
^=s^ -- ■% 










' ^>. 



ii^: %,# ^'^^M^^^ % 



1 ^ ^ ,^^^mi 



??. >} 



V 




xQ^^ 



<\' 












.0^ . 



,,'^- 





















VP ,^;\' 






V *^ 






# 


^'' "'^-- 


v^' 




^^ ■" 








^a "^ 


vO 


o 




w ■>. 


\ 


-<. 




^\,o^ 






^o 



'/- 



,--,^-?:V, 






o 0' 



x^^ ^%^/;Mi^^^^ 1 



,0o 



a\ -^^ 






« 






</> 






-^ .0^" 










-' .^^ 



</•■ 



■^ ^> 









0) 



\ 



^r~:.->,^ 



^—^/'yimk^_,^ 



,0o. 






> 



8 1^" -V 



-0- 






^-^^ 









.# * 






•v . - . '^ ^- '" "• ^ ^i^ 

\ - V 1 8 ^ -/-'_ -A^ ^ ' -v- ^ * o "> 
















'>' , 


..^ ,0 




-.^ 




,0^ 




. .c^" 




'%%"'' 






^ ^ 


c^ 




O 


A ^ 


-/- 


-# 





>0 c 



.0^ .. '^ 



-'/ C' . \/ <. >' -* „ '^^ 



■0-' •-b '^r^^^ ^' '"^/^^^^^^.^ rO 



,0- 









V ^ 

V- i<? t?\ 



.-\ 



o-,^\"'.-^.. 



.^~ 



;* 



-T^. 



\> 















/> <^; 



.^^' 



IRELAND 
SINGE THE UNION 

SKETCHES OF IRISH HISTORY 

FROM 1798 TO 1886 



BY 

JUSTIN Hv McCarthy, m.p. 



WITH COPIOUS INDEX. 



Chicago aub ^^cfo ^^xV 
BELFORD, CLARKE, AND CO. 

1887 



1898 



PRINTte AKC 80Uf« ay 

DONOHUE & Henneberry, 

CHICAGO. 



IRELAND 

SINCE THE UNION 



TO 

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE 

WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE, M.P. 

I DEDICATE THIS BEIE¥ RECOED 

OF 

▲ WRONG HE HAS DONE SO MUCH TO RIGHT AND 

AN ENMITY HE HAS RECONCILED 



PREFACE. 



Home Rule is the question of the hour. Every one is 
talkmg of it, thinking about it, writing upon it. The news- 
papers daily devote leading articles to the consideration 
of every phase of the subject, couched in the most con- 
trasting terms of approval and disapproval. Most of them 
allot a portion of their columns to the reception of outside 
opinion of the most varied kind upon the problem. States- 
men of every school seem eager to express their views, on the 
platform and in print, upon the question whether Ireland is 
entitled to any form of self-government or not. Mr. Morley, 
Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Stead, and others write and speak upon 
the subject with the same cool, keen good sense, and the 
same steadfast adhesion to Radical principles, which make 
them the true representatives of a Radical Party in and out- 
side the House of Commons. The so-called ' Unionist,' on 
the other hand, fumes and flares. He is consumed by fiery 
indignation. He is all for an appeal to the god of battles. 
The good old principle of might meaning right animates and 
sustains him, and his attitude towards the Irish people appears 
to be the old-fashioned ' Squelch them, by God ! ' one. 

It is a relief to turn from letters and from speeches which, 
if uttered to express the other side of the case, and printed 
in the Freeman's Journal or United Ireland, or spoken on 
National League platforms by any prominent Nationalist, 
would have been denounced for their shameless attempt to 



viii PREFACE 

sow dissension between the two races. It is pleasant to turn 
from such utterances to the letter from Mr. Eusldn which 
appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette on Tuesday, January 5, 
1886. I am glad to be able here to express my gratitude to a 
great man, to a great Englishman, for having cared to re- 
member just now, first, that the Irish ' are an artistic people, 
and can design beautiful things, and execute them with inde- 
fatigable industry ; ' secondly, that * they are a witty people, 
and can by no means be governed by witless ones ; ' and, 
thirdly, that ' they are an affectionate people, and can by no 
means be governed on scientific principles by heartless persons.' 
If English statesmen had more often cared to recognise or to 
remember the truths which Mr. Euskin so opportunely enforces, 
the question which is called Home Rule would not have so 
long and so profoundly troubled the minds of politicians and 
the time of Ministries. 

At last, after a period of infinite pain and infinite patience, 
that proud patience which the gods are said to love, the Irish 
people have found their reward. The question of Home Rule 
has been at last admitted into the charmed circle— as unstable 
in its circumscription as the enchanted tent of the Eastern 
Pari Banou — the region of practical politics. It is some years 
since the words Home Rule became the watchwords of a poli- 
tical party ; it is some years since they became the recognised 
war-cry of a devoted and determined minority in the House 
of Commons. Those years have been years of more than 
Egyptian trial to the Irish people. During their first days, 
in the age of what our opponents are now pleased to call 
the moderate Home Rulers, the Enghsh Press and the mem- 
bers of all English parties were well-nigh unanimous in their 
assurances that the question of Home Rule was inadmissible 
and undebatable, and that if we pleaded till the crack of 
doom no English statesmen would ever condescend to enter- 



PREFA CE ix 

tain any scheme whatever for the restoration of an Irish 
ParHament. Hearing, indeed, was not refused to us — occa- 
sionally. In that Sa.turnian epoch of amiable inactivity when 
Butt and Shaw swayed the destinies of an almost absolutely 
unimportant section of the House of Commons, the Govern- 
ment was wont, every session, to allow the Home Bulers a 
field-night for the exposition of their hateful but harmless 
doctrines : hateful because they were the expression of any 
discontent with the perfection of existing rule in Ireland ; 
hai^mless because they were but the birth of a midsummer 
madness working on the brains of a few idle or eloquent politi- 
cians, and were about as serious a contribution to statesman- 
ship as the desire of the moth for the star and the night for 
the morrow. So these field-nights came and went, and Mr. 
Butt made his speech and Mr. P. J. Smyth gave a well- 
prepared entertainment, in which the ideas of 1848 and the 
peroratioiis of Henry Grattan formed an ingenious and not 
unattractive medley, and Mr. Butt's other followers said their 
permitted say, and were decorously listened to. Then the 
leaders of the Treasury Bench would make elaborate replies, 
in which the Irish demands were quietly puffed out of sight 
in a cloud of compliments to the sincerity and the ability of 
Mr. Butt, or Mr. Shaw, or Mr. P. J. Smyth. At this rate of 
progress any recognition of the Irish claim would have been 
accorded at the time when, according to Rabelais, the 
Coqcigrues come home — that is to say, never. 

But towards the end of the last Parliament which Lord 
Beaconsfield presided over, the Home Rule party in the 
Plouse of Commons began to display signs of unusual ani- 
mation, of commotion, of agitation. Their languid ranks 
had been recruited by some new men, and the new men 
carried on the fight after new methods. This heralds the open- 
ing of the second period of Home Rule, the period of Parnell. 



X PREFACE 

When the Liberal Government entered into office in the 
early spring of 1880, Mr. Parnell was the chosen leader of 
the Irish Parliamentary party. That party, in obedience 
to the wishes of the Irish people, sat in opposition to the new 
Government, and announced their intention of sitting in' 
opposition to any Government that refused to recognise the 
right of Ireland to regulate her own local affairs after her 
own fashion. That resolve, apparently a slight thing in 
itself, had a deeper significance in it than many politicians 
at that time were keen enough to perceive. Up to that hour 
every Irish party in Parliament had been made the victim of 
a spurious tradition which forced them into an alliance with 
the Whigs, and dragged them helpless and hopeless at the tail 
of every successive Whig Administration or Whig Opposition. 
The recent elections, which have for the first time severed the 
connection between the Whigs and the Eadicals by creating 
the amazing Wliig-Tory alliance, were the fitting sequel to 
and the fitting justification of the attitude of the followers of 
Mr. Parnell in 1880. A few fossil members of the old sham 
Home Eule school persisted for some time in sitting below 
the gangway on the Government side of the House, but these 
have all vanished from the field of Irish politics, and their 
place knows them no more. 

I am not going to tell over again here the history of the 
past six years as it affected Ireland in and out of Parliament. 
The Liberal Government, face to face with a small but 
solid group of Irishmen, who boldly avowed that they 
placed their own country's interest before the temporary in- 
terests of either of the two great parties, lost for a time its 
temper and its head. In defiance of the principles which 
are most dear to the Liberal mind, the Government deter- 
miiied at once to grapple with this defiant minority and 
crush them out of existence. Then be^an one of the most 



PREFA CE xi 

marvellous constitutional struggles which the world has ever 
witnessed. On the one hand was the most powerful Ministry 
of modern times, numbering in its ranks all the talent of its 
party, supported by a swollen and certain majority ; on the 
other, a band of men, all unknown, almost all young, led by 
a young man who had only been a short time in the House 
of Commons, but to whom Ascendency already paid the 
compliments of a cordial dislike. The Irish nation at home, 
in England, in America, and in Australia, watched the con- 
test with burning eyes and throbbing hearts. They saw their 
representatives expelled again and again, for fighting against 
coercive measures of new and miraculous strictness. They 
saw their country bound by successive Coercion Acts which 
recalled, by their ingenious ferocity, the pleasant days of the 
Penal Laws. They saw their leaders imprisoned for failing to 
admit that the administration of Mr. Forster was the greatest 
blessing that heaven could offer them. They saw the de- 
gradation of Dublin defended by what it seemed not unfair to 
term executive conspiracy. They saw themselves reproached 
for crimes and outrages which were the direct fruit of the 
administrative folly of Mr. Forster. They saw, day by day, 
how the most influential voices of the English Press kept 
taunting the party which followed Mr. Parnell with repre* 
senting in no sense either the Irish people or their wishes, 
and assuring them that, come what might, they should never,, 
never have Home Eule. 

Well, they saw all this, but they saw other sights which 
made their spirits more of comfort. They saw their leaders 
come out of prison as determined to carry on the struggle as 
when they went into prison. They saw victim after victim of 
the coercive laws sent as delegate of the Irish people to take 
a place by Mr. Parnell, and help him to fight for the cause 
in the House of Commons. They saw the fall of Mr. Forster. 



xii PREFACE 

They witnessed the resignation of Mr. Trevelyan. They saw 
the defeat of the great Ministry. They rejoiced at last in 
the adoption by Enghind's greatest statesman of the princi- 
ples for which they had so long struggled. 

The bitter taunt which has been so often levelled at the 
Irish Parliamentary party, that they do not represent the 
Irish people, has been satisfactorily answered once for all. The 
principles which Mr. Parnell advocates have swept Ireland 
from the centre to the sea, and he returns to Parliament the 
unquestioned leader of a following of nearly ninety men, of 
whom no inconsiderable portion are recruited from that pro- 
vince of Ulster which was for so long the hope, the prop, and 
the garrison of ' Ascendency ' in Ireland. With Derry and 
the west division of Belfast represented by Irish Nationalists, 
arguments based on the hostility of Ulster to Home Rule do 
not count for much. Lord Hartington finds some cheer in 
still repeating the old parrot cry. When once Lord Harting- 
ton gets an idea into his head, it is not very easy to dislodge 
it, and accordingly Lord Hartington still finds a strange 
delight in declanng that Ireland cordially detests Mr. Parnell 
and all his works and pomps, and is only coerced by the 
terrible National League into returning his lieutenants by 
enormous majorities. Horror of coercion in the mind of the 
upholder and the approver of coercive laws for Ireland seems 
to me as incongruous as the name of honour in the mouth of 
Joseph Surface seemed to Lady Teazle, or as the name of 
God seemed on the lips of Margaret to the dying Valentine. 
If, however. Lord Hartington can really delude himself into 
the belief that Ireland sends eighty-five men to support Mr. 
Parnell in Parliament because Ireland distrusts and detests 
Mr. Parnell, I can only express my sympathy for those who 
see in Lord Hartington the future leader of the Liberal party. 

The question that is before the English public just now is 



PREFA CE xiii 

simply this : * Are you prepared to listen at all to the voice of 
Ireland, speaking as it does in strict accordance with consti- 
tutional tradition and usage through the mouths of a vast 
preponderance of Irish members, duly and constitutionally 
elected, and supported as it is by so large a proportion of the 
English people ? or are you determined to deny to Ireland that 
expression of a national desire and that freedom of national 
government of which you are so proud to have been the 
champions in almost every other comitry in Europe ? ' 

What, after all, is the meaning of this demand for Home 
Rule, of which in one way or another we have heard so much 
for the last decade ? What is the demand which for so many 
years the leaders of the two great English parties have agreed 
in ignoring, and which now the real leader of the Tory party 
would be willing to satisfy, if by so doing he could deprive the 
leader of the Liberal party of the honour of carrying out the 
great work he has begun ? 

The opponents of Home Rule are, roughly speaking, of two 
kinds : those who refuse even to consider the question at all ; 
and those who temporise with it, who do their best to dyke it 
back for the time being, for the hour, even for the minute, and 
who feel a curious gratification in the most temporary post- 
ponement of a puzzling problem. The first of these two classes 
of opponents of Home Rule has at least the merit of simplicity 
in its arguments. It boldly asseverates that Home Rule means 
dismemberment of the Empire, and it stubbornly refuses to 
listen to any argument which would interfere with that as- 
sumption. * Dismemberment of the Empire ' is its catch- 
word, its counter sign ; it has even become its war-cry. It 
repeats it, as the credulous might repeat some wizard's spell, 
in the hope of dissipating the danger which it believes to 
menace it. 

In certain of his speeches, most notably that ever-memor- 



xiy PREFACE 

able utterance at Newport, Lord Salisbury invoked Home 
Rule. When the invocation was answered, he seems to have 
shrunk from the consequences of his own temerity, and to be 
now nursing a baffled indignation because a stronger states- 
man than he has stepped boldly forward and prepared to deal 
righteously with the spirit of Irish discontent. 

Mr. Gladstone lost a great opportunity when, after his 
visit to Ireland some years back, he failed to perceive the 
strength of the national demand, the keenness of the national 
desire for some form of home government. He lost some 
precious years in the effort to suppress the Irish party in 
Parliament, and in shutting his senses to the fact that they 
were strong because they spoke with the voice and acted with 
the strength of a people. But Mr. Gladstone was too great a 
statesman to let one lost opportunity prove the precedent for 
another, or to excuse loss of time in the past by losing more 
time in the present. The result of the two recent elections 
proves the strength of Irish Nationalism. That pohtical map 
of Ireland which the :Pall Mall Gazette published the other 
day, with its vast surface of white representing the constitu- 
encies which have returned Mr. Parnell's followers, and its 
pitiful patch of black in the far north to distinguish all that 
is left of Ireland which is not national, is the eloquent symbol 
of a more remarkable change than has ever been represented 
in any atlas of maps of Europe by treaty. If the voice of a 
nation is ever to count for anything, tlie voice of a nation has 
spoken in Ireland, and Mr. Gladstone has been too ardent an 
advocate of the rights of nationahties abroad to deny their 
existence at home. 

If, however, any explanation of what Home Rule means 
is really needed — and I am compelled, to my surprise, to 
beheve lliat it is, from hearing the question still so often 
asked, iu ail honesty, ' What do you Home Rulers really want ?' 



PMUFA CE XV 

— I can explain wliat I mean by Home Rule easily enougli. I 
should like to see, I hope soon to see, Ireland placed in much the 
same relationship to the Imperial Parliament as that in which 
a State of the American Union stands to the central governing 
body at Washington. That I consider to be, roughly speak- 
ing, the length and breadth of the Home Rule demand. It 
may perhaps, however, be well further to set down a few of 
the things that Home Rule does not mean. 

It does not mean dismemberment of the Empire, or dis- 
integration of the Empire, or any injury whatever to the 
Empire. It does not mean separation or anything like separa- 
tion. It does not include any control of an army or a navy, 
or any power of levying what may be called Imperial taxation, 
or of negotiation with foreign Powers. It does not propose to 
abrogate in any way the Imperial functions of the English 
Parliament. It no more proposes to do any of these things 
than the State of Massachusetts proposes to do them. 

What is there, then, so alarming in the suggestion of Home 
Rule for Ireland ? Englishmen see with composure some 
form of Home Rule or other existing in all the dependencies 
of the Crown, from the great Antipodean colonies to the little . 
Isle of Man, within almost a stone's throw of these shores, j 
If Canadians and Australasians and Manx have Home Rule, 
and having it are happy and contented, and the solidarity of 
the Empire is in no way injured, but rather greatly strength- 
ened thereby, why should it be denied to Ireland ? 

But if Home Rule for Ireland, some of our opponents 
argue, why not Home Rule for Scotland ? why not Home 
Rule for Wales ? To which I answer, question for question, 
'Why not, indeed?' If Scotland and Wales desire Home 
Rule, I can conceive no just or even sane reason for denying 
it. If the Scotch people were to demand Home Rule to- 
morrow, with anything likj the imanimity of the Irish pejplj, 



xvi PREFACE 

we all know perfectly -well that it would be conceded to tliem 
immediately, and almost without discussion. The reason 
why Scotland does not demand Home Rule as yet is because, 
up to this time, she has practically enjoyed the bulk of its 
benefits. Scotland has had her own way all along. She 
has worshipped in freedom at her own shrines ; she has lived 
beneath the shelter of her own laws. When she wishes for 
greater freedom than she now enjoys, all she has to do is to 
ask for it and she will get it immediately. But because Scot- 
land and Wales do not ask for Home Rule, and presumably 
do not want it, is no reason why Ireland, who does ask for it, 
and does want it, should be denied her petition. 

Some writers and speakers have expressed a fear that, in 
the event of any system of self-government being granted 
to Ireland, the Protestant minority would suffer, in one way 
or another, from oppression at the hands of the Catholic 
majority. Such an apprehension is curiously unfounded. It 
is scarcely likely that a people, many, indeed most, of whose 
best beloved heroes were Protestants, and whose present leader 
is himself a Protestant, would be likely to prove in any sense 
or degree hostile to their Protestant fellow-countrymen. I 
may remind my readers that while Protestants have been 
returned, again and again, as representatives of Catholic con- 
stituencies in Ireland, that while Irish Catholics have, again 
and again, entrusted the representation of "their grievances to 
Protestant delegates, it was until within the last few months 
practically impossible for any Catholic to find a seat in any 
English constituency. The present Parliament, upon its new 
and extended franchise, does contain a few Catholic represen- 
tatives of Enghsh constituencies, but in the Parliament of 
1880-1885 there was, I think, only one, and he was regarded 
as remarkable for having gained that rare and almost un- 
attainable distinction. It is not long ago since the English 



PREFACE xvii 

Press and English public opinion generally seemsd innniraous 
in agreeing that the career of Lord Ripon as a statesman and 
politician was closed in England because he had become 
converted to the Catholic faith. On the other hand, I have 
heard that Catholic voters in Ireland have expressed regret 
that some Nationalist candidate was not a Protestant, in order 
that they might show their tolerance of a creed which was 
not their own, and in the present Nationalist party several 
Protestants are enrolled among its most prominent members. 
It is a matter of statistics, too, that a vast number of Protes- 
tant Azotes were recorded for the Nationalist and Catholic 
candidates at the just-passed general elections, a fact which 
serves to show that a very great number of the Irish Protes- 
tants do not share the apprehensions expressed for their safety 
by some writers and thinkers on this side of the Channel. 
The tolerance which English Protestantism has not always 
extended to Catholics, the Irish Catholics have always ex- 
tended, and always will extend, towards their Protestant 
fellow - countrymen . 

In the following pages I propose to sketch briefly the more 
salient features of Irish history since the Union, including, 
of course, certain of the events which heralded the Union. 
I do not propose in this volume to give a minute and exhaus- 
tive presentment of the history of eighty-six troubled years. 
Some parts will be dwelt upon at greater length than others. 
My aim is to present a sketch, not a complete picture ; a 
sketch, however, that may be of service to the student of the 
Home Rule question. 

I hope and believe that the time of Home Rule for Ireland 
has arrived. I am convinced that it will bring peace and 
welfare and content to my country. Her manufactures will 
again rise and flourish ; commerce will once more visit the 
grass-grown wharves of her sea-cities, and fill the vacant 

a 



xviii PREFACE 

spaces of those deserted buildings which now stand in ruined 
desolation, more melancholy than Karnak or Corinth. A 
people trained at last to patience and self-reliance will take a 
just pride in the fulfilment of those duties as citizens of which 
they have been so long deprived. The Church that has for 
so long guided the nation through darkness and the valley of 
the shadow of death will exercise its loftiest duty as the guide 
and guardian of a regenerated race. The Irish nation has 
been taking shape under our eyes ; her children need now 
only the privileges of freedom to exercise those privileges 
worthily. The activity of the country will be directed into 
its proper channels. National occupation, and the respon- 
sibilities of administration, will bring with them those virtues 
of statesmanship which the Irish race have always shown in 
lands more happily ruled than their own. That national 
strength which now is spent, and rightly spent, in agitation 
for a great end, will be then employed in the fulfilment of 
those civic duties which the new conditions of political exist- 
ence will create and establish. 

Not to Ireland alone, however, will the advantages be 
limited. All that is to be gained from friendship instead of 
enmity, from trust instead of distrust, from loving fellowship 
and the heart's alliance instead of suspicion and the heirloom 
hate, all these may yet be England's if England choose. In 
God's name, is it not better to have, across that strip of stormy 
water, a nation of free men who are friends, fellow-workers 
for the Empire's welfare, firm allies in danger, than to be the 
most unhappy masters of an island of unconquered and 
insurgent bondsmen ? 

Justin Huntlt McGabtht. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER PAGB 

I. The Penal Laws ••••.••• 1 

II. The Parliament . • 14 

III. The Volunteeks • .29 

IV. Ninety-Eight 38 

V. The Union 56 

VI. Catholic Emancipation 75 

VII. Daniel O'Connell . • .85 

VIII. The Tithe Wak . . . . ... ... 102 

IX. Kepeal 109 

X. The 'Nation' . 117 

XI. Young Ireland • • . . . . . • 125 

XII. Youngest Ireland 133 

XIII. The Irish Brigade . • • 141 

XIV. The Phcenix Conspiracy 148 

XV. John Dillon and John Bright 156 

(XVI. The Land Question 108 

XVII. Fenianism . 177 

XVIII. Disestablishment and Education 194 

f XIX. The Home Eule Movement ...... 211 

XX. The Land League 289 

XXI. Coercion 290 

XXII. Orange and Green , . 311 

XXIII. Home Eule 344 

INDEX 355 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE PENAL LAWS. 

In Limerick city there stands a statue of one of the greatest 
of Irish patriots and one of the most gaUant of Irish soldiers. 
It is the statue of Patrick Sarsfield, Earl of Lucan, and seldom 
was statue more appropriately situated than that of the heroic 
soldier within the compass of the city of tlie violated treaty. 
All that a man could do to secure the rights of his country, 
and the civil and religious liberties of his countrymen, was 
done by Sarsfield. His conduct of the immortal defence has 
been told a thousand times, but every fresh repetition of the 
familiar tale only serves to lend a brighter lustre to the 
genius and the courage of Sarsfield, and to add a darker stain 
to the faithlessness of those in whom Sarsfield, with the gener- 
ous simplicity of a soldier and a gentleman, had been induced 
to place a mistaken confidence. 

The siege of Limerick is one of the most famous events in 
history. Seldom have the fortunes of two countries and of 
two kingly causes depended more definitely upon the result of 
one single episode in a great campaign. The fight by the 
Boyne water, the capture of Athlone, the rout of Aughrim — 
all these defeats and disasters might yet have been repaired if 
only the siege of Limerick had ended otherwise, or, ending 
as it did, had been followed by faith from the victors. The 
cause of King James looked gloomy enough, but the cause of 
Ireland was hopeful. The Stuart prince had promised much, 

B 



2 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

had performed soniewliat. Poynings' Act had been repealed. 
A measure had been passed restoring the dispossessed Irish 
to their property. But the king lost heart and head in the 
hour of adversity, and, abandoning the Irish and the French 
who had served him so well, he fled with more than royal 
rapidity to France, and left the last act of the great drama to 
be played out without him by the Shannon Kiver and behind 
the walls of Limerick. The Stuart princes, with all their 
faults, were not wanting in personal courage, although actual 
heroism was not included among their virtues then or there- 
after. But James lives in the Irish ballad literature, which 
has preserved so well and so truly the salient features of her 
story at a time when any other kind of chronicling was well- 
nigh impossible, as ' Craven Shemus,' and under the burden 
of yet more uncomplimentary epithets. 

James had fled and St. Euth was dead, and the last hopes 
of Ireland were hidden behind the walls of Limerick, where 
Talbot of Tirconnel and Patrick Sarsfield were making the 
last stand. The two men were widely different. Richard Tal- 
bot, Duke of Tirconnel, witnessed as a youth the Cromwellian 
massacres in Drogheda. The memory of those horrors never 
left him, we are told. We may easily imagine that the light- 
hearted Irish nobleman, who plays so considerable a part in 
the De Grammont ' Memoirs ' of the court of the second 
Charles, could not easily banish from his memory the fearful 
political baptism of his boyhood. Even in merriest and 
maddest hours, at Whitehall, while conversing with the 
' languishing Boynton,' whom he afterwards wedded, or 
jesting with Killegrew and Hamilton and Buckingham, or 
losing money to his Merry Majesty, we can readily believe 
that often and often thoughts came across his brain which 
turned the lustre of the flambeaux to the glare of burning 
houses, the chatter of the courtiers to the cries of Cromwell's 
Ironsides, the soft speech of Lely's painted beauties to the 
groans of murdered women, and the shining Thames beyond 
to the Boyne, rushing fearful of its bloody foam to the sea. 

Talbot of Tirconnel had always been faithful to the Stuart 



THE PENAL LAWS 3 

cause. He had followed the young prince of the house to 
exile over seas ; the historical ' twenty-mnth of May,' when 
* the king did enjoy his own again,' was a glorious day in his 
eyes, as in the eyes of hundreds of other Cavalier gentlemen. 
Under the restored Stuarts he had been appointed to the 
Governorship of Ireland, the first Roman Catholic who had 
held the post since the introduction of the Protestant faith 
into the country. His rule was characterised by his strenuous 
efforts to undo the anti- Catholic legislation of the Ormond 
administration. The fact that he, a Catholic and an Irishman, 
should wish to see justice and religious liberty allowed to his 
countrymen and the companions of his faith, has made his 
name too often the object of the obloquy and the scorn of 
historians, who are unwilling to see liberty, either political or 
religious, enjoyed by any but themselves and their own people 
or party. 

When the war between James and William broke out the 
Stuart king found his fastest and best ally in the Duke of 
Tirconnel. Talbot had been the Duke of York's closest friend 
and confidant ; he was now, in the hour of stress, for a time 
the prop of his hopes and the buttress of his tottering throne. 
The Catholics in Ireland fought for the Stuart monarch less 
for that monarch's sake than for love of Talbot of Tirconnel 
and the name he bore. But victory went with William ; and 
so, in course of time, Talbot of Tirconnel found himself shut 
up in Limerick to make the last stand for a lost cause, with 
only one man to help him in the inevitable hour. But that 
one man was worth a hundred, for his name was Sarsfield. 

Sarsfield's courage and daring, his military genius, his 
ready enterprise and unfailing resource, had kept the flag of 
Limerick flying in the face of disaster after disaster. His 
famous midnight raid, which resulted in the destruction of 
the Williamite siege-train, is one of the most gallant, as it is 
one of the most desperate, deeds recorded in the history of the 
war. Perhaps, however, the qualities which most especially 
deserve our admiration in Sarsfield are the patient dignity 
and soldierly composure with which he consented again and 

b2 



4 IBELAND SINCE THE UNION 

again to take a secondary place to men of abilities and capa- 
cities infinitely below his own. The young Duke of Berwick, 
indeed, might complain that Sarsfield's imperial tongue, like 
that of Shakespeare's Suffolk, was sometimes ' rough and 
stern, used to command, untaught to plead for favour ; ' but 
the marvel rather is, that a man of the military genius of Sars- 
field should have played so long and so patiently a secondary 
part to commanders so much his inferiors— and a man might 
be a very able soldier indeed, and yet remain inferior to 
Patrick Sarsfield — with no further display of impatience than • 
an occasional rough word to a royal or semi-royal duke. 

But a little while and Sarsfield was practically alone in 
Limerick. Tirconnel, whose body had long been wasted by 
disease, died suddenly of apoplexy. Death behind the walls 
of Limerick was a not unfitting close to a career that had 
practically begun behind the walls of Drogheda. Between those 
two fatal sieges how much that strange, brilliant, fitful life had 
experienced ! Exile in Flanders, faithful adherence to what 
seemed a ruined cause, triumphant return, flight from Popish 
Plot phantasm and Titus Gates' accusations, the glitter and 
riot of an evil court, rule in Ireland, once again a struggle for 
the Sfcuart cause, this time going out for ever, and then the 
end. A month and a half after Tirconnel's death the treaty 
was signed, the city was surrendered, and Sarsfield marched 
out with all the honours of war. 

All the world knows the eventful scene which followed. 
The standards of England and France, set up outside the 
city, wooed the Irish soldiery with a choice of foreign service. 
Out of fifteen thousand men only one thousand turned to the 
banner of the Boyne. The great bulk of the Irish army, with 
the exception of a few who chose neither service and sought 
their homes, rallied beneath the flag of France. 

On the October morning of 1691 when the lilies of France 
and the standard of St. George floated opposite to each other 
outside the walls of Limerick, one Irish gentleman believed 
that he had secured for his countrymen something like due 
recognition of their political rights and their religious liber- 



THE PENAL LAWS 5 

ties. Patrick Sarsfield, as he watched the flower of the 
Jacobite army rallying beneath the French banner, must have 
rejoiced in his heart to think that his countrymen, who were 
thus marching with all the honours of war into foreign ser- 
vice, had left their country under the shame of no inglo- 
rious defeat and no humiliating subjugation. The Treaty of 
Limerick was signed and sealed. The first article of that 
Treaty promised solemnly that the Koman Catholics in Ire- 
land should enjoy all the privileges in the exercise of their 
religion which were consistent with the laws of Ireland, or 
which they had enjoyed in the reign of King Charles II. As 
this was not precise enough, the article went on to say that, 
as soon as a Parliament could be summoned, the English 
sovereigns pledged themselves to procure for the Roman 
Catholics such further security in that particular as would 
preserve them from any disturbance upon the account of their 
religion. The thought of this article must have soothed the 
mind of Sarsfield on his way to exile. He may well have 
believed, in the fine words of John Mitchel, that he was 
leaving behind him as a barrier against oppression of the 
Catholics at least the honour of a king. 

The honour of a king was as worthless as a dicer's oath. 
At lovers' perjuries Jove, according to Juliet, is said to laugh, 
but no poet has ever yet dared to fancy the Power of Heaven 
smiling upon the treachery of monarchs and the repudiation 
of solemn covenants entered into between State and State. 
There is a beautiful Irish ballad, with music melancholy 
as a caoine, which asks, * Ah, why, Patrick Sarsfield, did we let 
your ships sail away to French Flanders from Green Innisfail ? " 
If Sarsfield could have dreamed that the Magna Charta of 
his faith was but to prove the perjured preface to the Penal 
Laws, we may well be sure that the twelve thousand men who 
marched out of Limerick town, with colours flying and drums 
beating, to take service under Louis of France, would have 
whitened with their bones no 'far foreign fields from Dunkirk 
to Belgrade,' and that the blood of Landen would, indeed, have 
been shed for Ireland. But the hope of Ireland was across the 



6 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

seas ; her leaders had kissed James's hand at Brest ; the rank 
and file of the defenders of Lmierick had become French citi- 
zens, when the monstrous perfidy of the English Government, 
in horrible travail, gave birth to the Penal Laws. 

Sarsfield was dead before this. At the great overthrow, in 
July 1693, of the allies under William by Luxembourg, at the 
battle of Landen, he received his death-wound. Everyone 
knows the sad and lovely legend, according to which the dying 
soldier, putting his hand to his wound and drawing it back 
wet and red with his best blood, sighed out the heroic aspira- 
tion that that blood had been shed for L'eland. He died of his 
wounds a few days after the battle. His wife, Lord Clanri- 
carde's daughter, married, some two years after his death, 
that very Duke of Berwick whose hot youth had protested 
against Sarsfi eld's superior judgment. It is one of the curiosi- 
ties of history that almost all the women who were loved 
by the great heroes of Ireland married after the deaths of 
their lovers — Lady Lucan, Lady Edward Fitzgerald, the wife 
of Wolfe Tone, and Sarah Carran. 

Historians of all schools agree in praise of Patrick Sars- 
field. Macaulay, who had little love for Ireland and for any 
champion of the house of Stuart, admits that he was a * gentle- 
man of eminent merit, brave, upright, honourable, careful of 
his men in quarters, and certain to be always found at their 
head in the day of battle.' A Williamite historian, quoted by 
Mr. O'Cailaghan, says : ' Arminius was never more j)opular 
among the Germans than Sarsfield among the Irish. To this 
day his name is venerated— ca^ii^-z^r adhuc. No man was 
ever more attached to his country, or more devoted to his 
king and his religion.' It may, indeed, be declared that all 
Irish history does not boast a nobler gentleman than the gallant 
soldier, great of mind as he was gigantic of body, whose brave 
heart ceased to beat in the little town of Huy in 1693. 

There were, indeed, penal laws existing before ever seal 
had been set to the Treaty of Limerick. Catholics were de- 
barred from le'onging to corporations; certain civil offices 
were closed against them ; they were subject tj fine for non- 



THE PENAL LAWS 7 

attendance at the places of worship at the Established Church 
on Sundays ; and the Chancellor had the power of appointing 
a guardian to the child of a Catholic parent. But these penal 
laws were not very oppressively enforced in the days of 
Charles II. Catholic lawyers and Catholic doctors practised 
their callings comparatively freely. The very least, therefore, 
that the stipulations of the Treaty of Limerick could be tor- 
tured into meaning, guaranteed to the Irish Catholics the 
degree of toleration accorded to them under Charles II. But 
the Williamite Government soon showed that they preferred 
to act with a treachery unparalleled in Occidental history 
rather than continue to extend to the Catholics of Ireland 
even this miserable measui:e of toleration. 

The Butch general Ginkel, who had been most eager to 
swell the ranks of William with the heroic defenders of 
Limerick, was bitterly disappointed at the failure of his hopes. 
Be endeavoured in vain to induce Sarsfield to remain in Ire- 
land. Promises of all kinds were plentifully proferred, but 
Sarsfield was not to be tempted. He crossed the sea and laid 
his bright sword at the feet of King Louis. The French 
monarch, who thoroughly appreciated the value of his Irish 
adherents, welcomed the hero of Limerick, and immediately 
appointed him to the command of the second troop of the 
Irish Guards, the first troop being under the command of the 
impetuous young Buke of Berwick. 

Up to this time Catholics had sat among the Lords and 
Commons of the Irish Parliaments. But on the assembly in 
1692 of the first Irish Parliament held after the surrender of 
Limerick, an oath was framed by the Protestant majority and 
presented to all the members of both Houses. It must be 
remembered that the oath to be administered to Catholics 
had been specially provided for in the Treaty of Limerick. 
It called upon the Catholic subjects of William and Mary 
to swear allegiance to the sovereigns, and it was specially 
laid down by the famous ninth article of the Treaty that the 
oath to be administered to Catholics who submitted to the 
English Government should be this oath and no other. 



8 IRELAND SINCE 2 HE UNION 

This ninth article was the first part of the Treaty to be 
broken. The new Parliamentary octh was fashioned with 
horrible ingenuity to insult and outrage every Catholic. 
The Catholic Peers and Commons who had attended the 
Parliament of 1692 quitted the two Houses in indignation. 
From that hour, for more than a century, till the Parlia- 
ment itself ceased to exist, no ^Catholic Irishman sat in his 
country's Senate. When a National Parliament again meets 
in Dublin it will be undoing by its presence not merely the 
evil work of the Act of Union, but the evil work of the Par- 
liament of 1692. 

All obstacles being thus removed from the National As- 
sembly by this flagrant violation of the Treaty, the ' Ascend- 
ency ' party were free to pursue unimpeded their process of 
repression. In 1695 the Viceroy, Lord Capel, summoned a 
Parliament, whose business it was to repudiate, one after 
another, the pledges and stipulations of the Treaty of Limerick, 
and to persecute the Catholics of Ireland with a ferocity 
which is without a parallel in the records of Oriental fanaticism. 
The wild multitudes who followed the conquering generals of 
Omar and Othman, and who offered the alternative of the 
Koran or death to the proud and populous cities of Syria, 
Persia, and Egypt, never attempted to impose upon their 
subordinated empires any code of laws so ingeniously intole- 
rant, so fantastically cruel, as those which the Ascendency 
party in Ireland now levelled at a Catholic people and the 
Catholic creed. 

In shameless defiance of the obligations of the Treaty of 
Limerick, and insolent disregard of the pitiful degree of tole- 
rance towards Catholics which had been observed during the 
reign of the second Charles, the Parliament of Capel deprived 
the Catholics of Ireland at one blow of education, of arms, 
and of their priesthood. Sarsfield was in his soldier's grave 
wdien that ' honour of a king ' to which he had trusted was 
thus perfidiously set aside. Certain historians have found 
some excuse for William of Orange and the part he played in 
this treachery. The Treaty, we are told, was violated against 



THE PENAL LA WS 9 

his will, and in spite of his own strongly-expressed resolution 
to keep faith with his Catholic subjects in Ireland. 

In these arguments there is no excuse for William. In 
those days the kingly office was invested with more personal 
power than belongs to it now. A king still had some of the 
influence and incurred some of the obligations of his position. 
If the king's supporters had prized their master's honour at 
anything more than contempt, they would not have forced 
him to break his word. Nay, they could not force him. The 
whole point of the argument against William lies in this : 
they could but urge him to be untrue ; they could not compel 
him. If William were unable to make his Ministers respect 
the royal honour he could have respected it himself and re- 
signed his sceptre. He was not obliged to wear a dishonoured 
crown. But if, under no matter what pressure, he consented 
to be a party to the breaking of the Treaty and the persecution 
of the Catholics, the ignominy is as much his as if his were 
the tongue which first prompted the treachery and his the 
hand which first desecrated the Treaty. 

Yet even Capel's Parliament, with all its hatred of the 
Catholics, and all the malignant ingenuity which turned that 
hatred into legal engines of oppression, was not comprehensive 
enough or thorough enough in its work to satisfy the Govern- 
ment. Capel and his creatures had done their best, but their 
work appeared clumsy and half-hearted to the statesmen of 
Queen Anne. It needed supplementing in the eyes of the poli- 
ticians of St. James's, and supplemented it accordingly was. 
The perverted intelligence of Capel's colleagues had not made 
the life of the Irish Catholic so hopelessly unbearable as to 
afford any reasonable hope of his disappearing as completely 
from the valleys of Ireland as the wolf had been made to dis- 
appear from English forests. Fresh work was done under 
the viceroyalty of the last Duke of Ormond — he who died years 
after an exile, who owed his safety to one Catholic country, 
and a beggar, who owed his daily bread to the bounty of another 
Catholic country. What was begun under Capel and well-nigh 
perfected under Ormond, received some further additions 



10 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

under the first and even under the third George. Bat it is 
to the ten years which embrace the last lustre of the seven- 
teenth century and the first lustre of the eighteenth century 
that the Penal Laws practically bplong. 

It is not necessary now — it is terrible to think that it ever 
could have been necessary — to waste any words in condemna- 
tion of these measures. Eloquence itself cannot add one stain 
to the shame or one sting to the horror of the bare recital of 
what these laws sought to do. Not even the genius of Burke, 
not even the eloquence of him ' on whose burning tongue truth, 
peace, and freedom hung,' can move the soul with a fiercer 
indignation than the mere enumeration in all their naked 
iniquity of what the Penal Laws were and what they were 
framed to accomplish. 

Under the Penal Laws the Catholic population of a Catholic 
country were deprived of almost every right that makes life 
precious. Lopping, Bishop of Meath, had proclaimed from 
the pulpit that Protestants were not bound to keep faith with 
Papists, and the violation of the Treaty of Limerick had 
justified his utterance. Lord Chancellor Bowes and Chief 
Justice Bobinson had proclaimed from the bench that the law 
did not suppose any sach person to exist as an Irish Catholic. 
The Penal Laws certainly did their best to insure that no 
such person should exist as an Irish Catholic. In their 
own country Irish Catholics were shut out from every civil 
or military profession ; from every Government office, from 
the highest to the lowest ; from almost every duty and every 
privilege that can be obeyed or enjoyed by citizens. A 
Catholic could not sit upon the benches of the Lords or 
Commons of the Irish Parliament. He could not record his 
vote for the election of a member of Parliament ; he could 
not serve in the army or the navy ; he could not plead at the 
bar or give judgment from the bench ; he could not become 
a magistrate or a member of a corporation, or serve on grand 
juries or in vestries ; he could not b^a sheriff, gamekeeper or 
a constable ; he could not give education ; he could not 
receive education ; he could not send his children abroad to 



THE PENAL LAWS 11 

bo educated. If in defiance of the law he, a Catholic, did 
send his child to receive in Continental colleges that know- 
ledge wbich was refused at home, be was subjected to a fine 
of 100/., and the child so educated was excluded from inherit- 
ing any property in Ireland or England. 

Not only was the Catholic denied the practice of his own 
religion, but conformity to the Protestant faith was enforced 
by statute. Every Catholic was liable to a fine of 60Z. a 
month for not attending a place of Protestant worship, and 
at any time any two justices of the peace could call a Catholic 
over sixteen years of age before them and bestow what pro- 
perty he possessed upon his next of kin if he refused to turn 
from his faith. ' Any four justices of the peace could, without 
the formalities of a trial, send any Catholic refusing to attend 
Protestant service into banishment for life. Every Catholic 
priest in the country pursued his sacred calling under a 
penalty of death. Deprived alike of his civil and religious 
rights, the Catholic was further plundered of his property. 
No Catholic might buy land, or inherit it, or receive it as a 
gift from Protestants, or hold life annuities or leases for more 
than thirty-one years, or any lease on such terms as that the 
profits of the land exceeded one third the value of the land. 
Any Protestant discovering that a farm held by a Papist pro- 
duced a profit greater than one-third of the rent could, imme- 
diately upon announcing this discovery, dispossess the Catholic 
owner, and seize the farm for himself. The estate of any 
Catholic not having a Protestant heir was gavelled, or di\ided 
in equal parts, between all his children. As cases occurred in 
which Protestants helped their Catholic fellow-citizens or 
relations by holding property in trust for them, it was made 
legal for any Protestant who suspected another Protestant of 
holdmg property in trust for a Catholic to file a bill against 
the suspected trustee, and, if he proved the case, to take the 
property away from him. A Protestant might at any time 
compel a Catholic to sell him his horse, however valuable, for 
6Z., and the horses of Catholics could always be seized without 
payment for the use of the militia. 



12 IRELAND SINCE THE UMUN 

j In order to guard against the consequences of any exas- 
peration into which these laws might goad their victims, they 
were rigidly prohibited from possessing arms. Any two 
justices or sheriffs might at any time issue a search warrant 
for arms against any Catholic household. Any Catholic who 
was discovered with any kind of weapon in his possession was 
liable to fines, imprisonment, whipping, and the pillory. / Not 
content, however, with depriving the Irish Catholic of all the 
rights of a free man, the Penal Laws aimed insidiously at his 
destruction by endeavouring to turn his own kin, his flesh 
and blood, his children, and his very wife against him. The 
eldest son of a Catholic upon apostatising became heir-at-law 
to the whole estate of his father, and reduced his father to 
the position of a mere life-tenant. An apostate wife was 
immediately freed from her husband's control, and assigned 
a certain proportion of her husband's property. Any child, 
however young, who professed the Protestant faith was 
immediately removed from its parents' care, and a portion of 
the parental property assigned to it. Furthermore, no mar- 
riage between a Catholic and a Protestant Avas recognised by 
the law. The fact that the husband and wife were of opposite 
faiths in itself rendered the marriage null and void, without 
any process of law whatever. A man might leave his wife or 
a woman her husband, after any period, no matter how long, 
of wedlock, free to marry again and bring a legalised illegiti- 
macy upon all the offspring of the former marriage. Such is 
the catalogue of the provisions of the Penal Code. 

The Code was well calculated to destroy for ever the 
Catholic population of Ireland. But it is the glory of the 
Irish people that they conquered, and were not conquered by, 
the Code. That proud patience which, according to the poet, 
the gods are said to love, was never more loftily displayed 
under circumstances of more heart-breaking oppression than by 
the Irish Catholics during the long horror of the eighteenth 
century. Of course there were some cases in which the 
tyranny of the law fostered a kind of servile homage to 
Protestant ascendency. * I knew,' says Mr. O'Neill Damit, 



TIIJ^ PENAL LAWS 13 

* one most respectable and very wealthy Catholic merchant 
who declared that, when a boy at school about the year 1780, 
he felt overwhelmed and bewildered at the honour of being 
permitted to play marbles with a Protestant schoolfellow.' 
But these were exceptional cases. To the majority persecution 
only stimulated the ardour of their devotion to their faith. 
The same persecution only lent a fresh courage and heroism 
to the ministers of that faith. Many and many a time were 
secret congregations fallen upon by the soldiers ; many and 
many a time was the Mass-stone, the ' Corrig-an-Aifrion,' 
reddened with the blood of a martyred priest. 

The ministers of religion were no less active in oifering to 
their scattered flocks that education which the harsh laws 
denied them. On the highway and on the hillside, in ditches 
and behind hedges, in the precarious shelter of the ruined walls 
of some ancient abbey or under the roof of a peasant's cabin, 
the priests set up schools and taught the children of their 
race. With death as the penalty of their daring — a penalty 
too often paid — they gave to the people of their persecuted 
faith that precious mental food which triumphantly thwarted 
the efforts of the Government to brutalise and degrade 
the Irish Catholic off the face of the earth. In those ' hedo-e- 
schools,' as they were called in scorn, the principles of re- 
ligion, of morality, and of patriotism were kept alive, and 
those elements of education which are the very life-blood of 
national existence freely dispensed. Eagerly as it was given, 
it was no less eagerly sought for. The readiness of the 
priests to teach was only equalled by the readiness of the 
people to be taught. The proudest place of honour in Irish 
history belongs to those hedge-schools and their heroic 
teachers. But for them the national cause and the national 
existence would have withered away under the blighting curse 
of the Penal Laws. From those hedge- schools came some of 
the brightest ornaments of modern Irish history. That great 
churchman who died a few years ago passed his childhood 
under the shadow of the Penal Laws. John M'Hale, Arch- 
bishop of Tuam, received at a hedge-school those early lessons 



14 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

which developed into that ecclesiastical scholarship and pro- 
found piety which would have done lionour to the proudest 
epoch in the history of the Church of the West. 

But though the 'unparalleled oppression,' as Burke called 
it, of the Penal Code might and did outrage and oppress, hang 
and scourge, fine and imprison, it could not succeed in 
degrading its victims. With all the bribes that it offered to 
apostasy, to family feud, and to infidelity in wedlock, it 
wholly failed to shake the loyalty of the Irish people to their 
■ faith and their affections. Few, indeed, were the renegades 
from their creed, few the unfilial sons, few the faithless 
husbands or the unworthy wives. The law might sanction 
and encourage the basest treachery and set a premium upon 
shame, but there was one thing it could not do — it could 
not make its victims treacherous or shake the unalterable 
firmness of their honour. 



CHAPTEB II. 

THE PABLIAMENT. 

It has been happily said that Ireland has no history during 
the greater part of the eighteenth century. Wliat Burke 
called ' the ferocious legislation of Queen Anne ' had done its 
work of humiliation to the full. For a hundred years the 
country was crushed into quiescent misery. Against the 
tyranny which made war at once upon their creed, their 
intellect, and their trade, the Irish had no strength to struggle ; 
neither in 1715 nor in 1745 did the Irish Catholics raise a 
hand for the Pretenders. The evidence of Arthur Young 
shows how terribly the condition of the peasantry had sunk, 
when he is able to state that ' Landlords of consequence have 
assured me that many of their cottars would think themselves 
honoured by having their wives and daughterE" sent for to the 
bed of their masters ; a mark of slavery which proves the 
oppres ion under which such people must live.' 



THE PARLIAMENT 15 

To add to the wretchedness of the people, a terrible famine 
ravaged the country in 1741, the horrors of which almost 
rival in ghastliness those of the famine of 1847. Great 
numbers died ; great numbers fled from the seemingly accursed 
country to recruit the armies of the Continent, and found 
death less dreadful on many well-fought fields than in the 
shape of plague or famine in their own land. Such elements 
of degradation and despair naturally begot all sorts of secret 
societies amongst the peasantry from north to south. White- 
boys, Oakboys, and Hearts of Steel banded against the land 
tyranny, and held together for long enough in spite of the 
strenuous efforts of the Government to put them down. If 
the military force,' said Lord Chesterfield, ' had killed half as 
many landlords as it had Whiteboys, it would have contributed 
more effectually to restore quiet ; for the poor people in Ireland 
are worse used than negroes by their masters, and deputies of 
deputies of deputies.' 

Bad as the condition of Ireland was, the English in 
Ireland proposed to make it worse by depriving it of what 
poor remains of legislative independence it still possessed. So 
early as 1703 a petition in favour of Union with England, and 
the abolition of the Irish Parliament, was presented to Queen 
Anne ; its prayer Avas rejected for the time, but the idea was 
working in the minds of those— and they were many — who 
wished to see Ireland stripped of all pretence at independence 
afforded by the existence of a separate Parliament, even 
though that Parliament were entirely Protestant. Seventeen 
years later, in the sixth year of George I., a vigorous blow 
was dealt at the independence of the Irish Parliament by an 
Act which not only deprived the Irish House of Lords of any 
appellate jurisdiction, but declared that the English Parliament 
had the right to make laws to bind the people of the kingdom 
of Ireland. The ' heads of a Bill ' might indeed be brought 
in in either House. If agreed to, tliey were carried to the 
Viceroy, who gave them to his Privy Council to alter if they 
chose, and send to England. They were subject to altera- 
tion by the English Attorney-General, and, when approved by 



16 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the English Privy Council, sent back to Ireland, where the 
Irish Houses could either accept or reject them in toto, but 
had no power to change them. 

The condition of the Irish Parliament all through the 
eighteenth century is truly pitiable. Its existence as a legis- 
lative body is a huge sham, a ghastly simulacrum. The Par- 
liament was one of the most eccentrically composed, most 
circumscribed, most corrupt legislative assemblies that the in- 
genuity of man has ever devised. To begin with : no Catholic 
could sit in Parliament ; no Catholic could even record his 
vote for a Protestant member. The Catholics were as abso- 
lutely unrepresented as if they did not exist ; and yet they 
made up the vast majority of the population which the Irish 
Parliament tried to govern or misgovern, and by an amazing 
fiction was supposed to represent. ' The borough system,' 
says Mr. Lecky, ' which had been chiefly the work of the 
Stuarts — no less than forty boroughs have been created by 
James I. alone— had been developed to such an extent that 
out of the 300 members who composed the Parliament ' — Mr. 
Lecky is, of course, speaking of the Lower House — ' 216 were 
returned for boroughs or manors. Of these borough mem- 
bers 200 were elected by 100 individuals, and nearly 50 by 10. 
According to a secret report drawn up by the Irish Govern- 
ment for Pitt in 1784, Lord Shannon at that time returned 
no less than 16 members, the Ponsonby family 14, Lord 
Hillsborough 9, and the Duke of Leinster 7.' 

That borough system was the successful means of corrupt- 
ing both Houses. James I. had been earnestly remonstrated 
with for calling forty boroughs into existence at one blow, and 
we have it on the authority of Hely Hutchinson that the 
king replied : ' I have made forty boroughs, suppose I had 
made 400 — the more the merrier.' A pleasant, statesmanlike, 
truly Stuart way of looking at all things, which was destined 
to prove fatal to the Stuarts and to nobler hearts and heads 
than theirs. Borough -owners who returned supple lieges to 
the Irish Parliament generally found their reward in a peerage. 
Thus, with a simplicity of corruption, the two Houses were 



THE PARLIAMENT 17 

undermined at once, for it is said that some half a hundred 
peers nominated no less than one hundred and twenty-three 
members of the Lower House. 

The Irish Parliament was like one of those buried cities 
dear to Irish legend which lie beneath the waters of some 
legend-haunted lake. The dark waters of corruption covered 
it ; there came a moment when those waters fell away and 
revealed an ancient institution, defaced, indeed, but still 
honourable and imposing ; then the engulfing waves closed 
over it again, and it vanished — but not for ever. 

Mr. Gladstone has summed up very happily the nature of 
Grattan's Parliament in words which apply appropriately 
enough to the condition of the Parliament which Grattan 
entered. 

* I know,' says Mr. Gladstone, 'that it is exceedingly diffi- 
cult to arrive at a clear and also a simple view of the state of 
Ireland under Grattan's Parliament. Ireland was at that 
time sharply and variously divided. Just let us consider the 
multitude of various and powerful interests that worked upon 
her destinies and fortunes. First of all there was a small 
section of the population who conducted the Government 
mainly with a view to jobbing and to personal interests — a 
very important section, on account of the power which they 
not uniformly, but frequently, exercised upon the English 
Government with regard to its policy in Ireland. Then there 
was the Presbyterian party. Though they were not less 
Protestant than the other, they had little or nothing to do 
with the Government. They, on the contrary, had at that 
period a strong inclination to Kepublicanism. Then there 
was the Executive Government and the British interest con- 
centrated in Dublin Castle, which has ever since, and certainly 
recently, become a proverbial expression, conveying but little 
to the minds of Englishmen, but conveying a great deal to 
the minds of Irishmen. It exercised a great and powerful 
influence. Then I look at the Eoman Catholic majority, but 
I cannot treat the Eoman Catholic majority of that period as 
being entirely one. It is quite clear that both the Eoman 





18 IRELAND SIITCE T3B UNIOIT 

Catliolic aristocracy and prelates stood in a position distinct 
from the mass of the Eoman Catholic people, and were liable 
to act on inducements held out to them from this side of the 
water. Then there was the great interest of the landlords. 
The Irish landlord of that time was a character not entirely 
devoid of certain attractive features. He was hospitable, he 
was high-spirited, he was bold ; but still he had his interests 
as a landlord, and he worked for them pretty generally, 
although not with that rigour and severity in all cases 
towards the tenant of which I am inclined to believe that the 
nineteenth century in a measure has seen more than the 
eighteenth century. Then there was a body of Irish repre- 
sented by Grattan and Ponsonby in Parliament, and by the 
greatest of Irishmen, Edmund Burke, on this side of the water. 
It is very difficult to get at the truth of Irish history with 
regard to this Irish Parliament. It was lamentably corrupt ; 
it was liable beyond anything to influence, and to sinister 
influence ; but there are certain things to be said in its favour. 
It made great and beneficial changes in the laws of your 
country. The distmction is to be drawn between the Irish 
Parliament before 1795 and the Irish Parliament after 1795, 
when a spirit of what may be called ferocious alarmism, 
instilled by the British Government and by the jobbing clique 
who called themselves Protestants, that is the Episcopalians 
in Ireland, took possession in the main of that Parliament. 
Before that time it had done many good things. Another 
good thing that maybe said of it, I believe with truth, is this — 
I am not aware that upon any occasion it refused to do any 
good act for Ireland which the British Government and which 
the Executive of the country were willing and desirous that it 
should do. But I have to give it one other credit. Whatever 
vices it had, and whatever defects it had, it had a true and 
genuine sentiment of nationality ; and, gentlemen, the loss of 
the spirit of nationality is the heaviest and the most deplorable 
and the most degrading loss that any country can undergo. 
In the Irish ParUament, with all its faults, the spirit of 
nationality subsisted, and I say with grief and shame that it 



TBE PAUZIAMENT 19 

is my 0"\vn conclusion and my own conviction that the main 
object of the Irish Legislative Union on the part of those who 
planned it and brought it about was to depress and weaken, 
and if possible to extinguish, that spirit of Irish nationality. 
So much for Grattan's Parliament.' 

It slowly drifted into the custom of sitting but once in 
every two years to vote the Money Bills for the next two 
twelvemonths. The Irish Exchequer derived half its receipts 
from the Eestoration grant of the ExciSe and Customs ; and the 
greater part of this money was wasted upon royal mistresses, 
upon royal bastards, and upon royal nominees. In the Upper 
House many of the temporal peers were Scotchmen or Eng- 
lishmen, some of whom had never even set foot in Ireland. 
The actual Irishmen on its roll were mostly the corrupt 
purchasers of degraded titles. Its Spiritual Peers, foreign to 
the country by religion and by race, were so obnoxious even to 
men of that religion and that race, as to wring from Swift 
the satirical declaration that all the Irish bishops appointed 
in England must have been murdered on their way by high- 
waymen who stole their garments, and filled their offices in 
Dublin. The Lower House was torn by factions, which the 
English Government ingeniously played off against each 
other ; it was crowded with the supple placemen of the 
Government, who were well rewarded for their obedient votes ; 
the bulk of the House was made up of nominees of the 
Protestant landlords. The Opposition could never turn out 
the Administration, for the Administration was composed of 
the irremovable and irresponsible Lords Justices of the Privy 
Council and certain officers of State. The Opposition, such 
as it was, was composed mainly of more or less ardent Jacob- 
ites, and of a few men animated by a patriotic belief in 
their country's rights. These men were imbued with the 
principles which had been set forth in the end of the seven- 
teenth century by William Molyneux, the friend of Locke, 
who, in his ' Case of Ireland,' was the first to formulate 
Ireland's constitutional claim to independent existence. His 
book was burnt by the English Parliament, but the doctrines 

02 



20 tRELAND SINCE THE XJNtON 

it set forth were in themselves a living fire, and unquench- 
able. 

During the reigns of the first two Georges, the Patriot 
party had the support of the gloomy genius and the fierce 
indignation of the man whose name is coupled with that of 
Molyneux in the opening sentences of Grattan's famous 
speech on the triumph of Irish independence. Swift, weary of 
English parties, full of melancholy memories of St. John and 
Harley and the scattered Tory chiefs, had come back to 
Ireland to try his fighting soul in the troublous confusion of 
Irish politics. It has been asserted over and over again that 
Swift had very little real love for the country of his birth. 
Whether he loved Ireland or no is little to the purpose, for 
he did her very sterling service. He was the first to exhort 
Ireland to use her own manufactures, and he was unsuccess- 
fully prosecuted by the State for the pamphlet in which he 
gave this advice. When Wood received the authority of the 
English Parliament to deluge Ireland with copper money of 
his own making, it was Swift's ' Drapier's Letters ' which 
made Wood and his friends the laughing-stock of the world 
and averted the evil. In Swift's ' Modest Proposal,' we have 
the most valuable evidence of the misery of the country. He 
suggests, with savage earnestness, that the children of the 
Irish peasant should be reared for food ; and urges that the 
best of these should be reserved for the landlords, who, as 
they had already devoured the substance of the people, had 
the best right to devour the flesh of their children. 

The year that Swift died, 1745, was the first year of the 
viceroyalty of Lord Chesterfield, one of the few bright spots 
in the dark account of Ireland in the eighteenth century. If 
all viceroys had been as calm, as reasonable, and as conside- 
rate as the author of the famous ' Letters ' showed himself to 
be in his dealings with the people over whom he was placed, 
the history of the succeeding century and a half might have 
been very different. But v.hen Chesterfield's viceroyalty 
passed away, the temperate policy he pursued passed away as 
well, and if we except Lord Fitzwilliam in 1795 and Lord Aber- 



THE PARLIAMENT 21 

deen in 1886, has seldom been resumed by the long succession 
of viceroys who have governed and misgoverned the country 
since. 

In the meanwhile a new spirit was gradually coming over 
the country. Lucas, the first Irishman, in the words of the 
younger Grattan, ' who, after Swift, dared to write freedom,' 
had founded the Freeman's Journal, a journal which ven- 
tured in dangerous times to advocate the cause of the Irish 
people, and to defy the anger of the English ' interest.' In 
the first number, which appeared on Saturday, September 10, 
1768, and which bore an engraving of Hibernia with a wreath 
in her right hand and a rod in her left, Lucas loudly advo- 
cated the duty and dignity of a free press, and denounced 
under the guise of 'Turkish Tyranny,' 'The Tyranny of 
French Despotism,' and ' The Ten Tyrants of Kome,' the 
Ministries and the creature whom his unsparing eloquence 
assailed. The Patriot party, too, was rapidly increasing its 
following and its influence in the country. The Patriotic 
party in Parliament had found a brilliant leader in Henry 
Flood, a gifted politician, who thought himself a poet, and 
who was certainly an orator. 

Henry Flood was born near Kilkenny in the year 1732, an 
uneventful year which his birth makes eventful. Like Grattan 
he shone for a season within the walls of Trinity, but he 
chose to complete his education by the Isis instead of by the 
Liffey, and coming to England he passed some time in that 
scholastic region where ' the warm, green-muffled Cumnor 
hills ' behold the towers of Oxford, and Bagley Wood, and 
Hinksey Eidge, and distant Wychwood, and ' the forest ground 
called Thessaly.' While Flood was at Trinity, a wealthy 
young man, of good family and influential connections, with 
a future opening easily and attractively out before him, there 
was a young sizar on the books of the college of whom he 
probably knew nothing and of whom the world was destined 
to hear much. There could hardly be two careers more 
widely separated by destiny than that of the son of the Chief 
Justice of the King's Bench in Ireland, rich, well-favoured, 



22 IRELAND SINGE THE UNION 

surrounded by friends and admirers, and the poor, wild, reck- 
less, good-humoured lad from the pleasant plain of Longford, 
who was always penniless and always merry and always idle, 
and whose face, so grimly seamed with smallpox, was always 
bright with humour and tender with pathos. 

While Henry Flood was enriching his mind and ennobling 
his style in the classic shades of Oxford or the learned retire- 
ment of the Temple, Oliver Goldsmith was enjoying that 
' thirty shilling ' revel which was so disastrously interrupted, 
or dreaming of American emigration, or listening with an 
author's pride in his heart and an author's very scant remune- 
ration in his pocket to his own songs sung by itinerant ballad- 
mongers at the college gates. Fortune was all smiles and 
roses for the one, all frowns for the other. Their lots were 
unlike in all particulars ; but the goal of both was the same, 
and both attained it, for both alike had, if nothing else in 
common, the common privilege of genius. The rich young 
gentleman and the poor young sizar had no connection within 
the confines of Trinity, but they were destined alike to attain 
in widely-differing ways to fame and honour and an abiding- 
place in the memory of their country. Destiny has reversed 
their two positions, and the poor sizar is more famous than 
the colleague who seemed so high above him. 

In 1759, while Goldsmith was struggling in London, 
writing ' The Life of Voltaire ' and bringing out the Bee in 
miserable lodgings, Flood entered Parliament as member for 
Kilkenny. He was then but twenty-seven years of age, singu- 
larly good-looking, well-trained in mind and body for the 
pohtical life on which he was launched. His Oxford hours 
had been devoted chiefly to the study of oratory, varied by the 
somewhat ineffectual pursuit of poetry. 

He wrote an ode to ' Fame,' which was perhaps as unlucky 
in reaching its address as that poem to posterity of which poor 
Jean Baptiste Eousseau was so proud. But his oratory was a 
genuine gift, which he carefully cultivated. We hear of his 
learning speeches of Cicero by heart, and writing out long 
passages of Demosthenes and iEschines. His character was 



THE PARLIAMENT 23 

kindly, sweet-tempered, and truthful. He was ambitious be- 
cause he was a man of genius, but his ambition was for his 
country rather than for himself, and he served her with a 
daring spirit, which only the profoundly statesmanlike qualities 
of his intellect prevented from becoming reckless. Two years 
after his election he married Lady Frances Maria Beresford, 
a wealthy match, which secured to him absolute independence 
to follow out his political career. 

Flood soon found himself the most conspicuous man in 
the Parliament and the head of what may be called the Oppo- 
sition in the Irish Parliament. The Parliament, thanks in a 
great degree to his genius and his labours, was destined to 
rise for a time out of its slough, and shine for a while resplen- 
dent in the eyes of all men. The Opposition hardly existed 
as a serious Opposition until Flood's genius and capacity for 
leadership welded it together into something like a homoge- 
neous whole. Before Flood's time the nominal Opposition 
was made up chiefly of Jacobite adherents still dreaming 
in a dim kind of purposeless way dreams of a possible Stuart 
restoration, which the lessons of 1715 and 1745 had not quite 
cured them of, and of a small number of disinterested and 
patriotic men who struggled as best they might against the 
overwhelming injustice and corruption which they faced 
These men Flood rallied. These men, proudly accepting the 
title which their enemies scornfully gave them of the * Pa- 
triots,' followed Flood zealously, and some of the oldest and 
basest privileges of the Parliament began to reel under the 
sturdy blows of the newly-inspired Opposition. Flood's best 
ally in his efforts was the man whose addresses a few years 
before had been burnt by the common hangman, who had 
been obliged to fly for safety into England, whom Johnson 
had hailed as ' the confessor of liberty,' and who now by 
Flood's side in Parliament was about to render the cause of 
Irish liberty sterling service by the publication of the Free- 
marl's Journal, Samuel Lucas. 

The first person against whom Hercules Flood flung him- 
self in his effort with the Augean stable of the Legion Club 



U IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

was that strange ecclesiastic, famous among the infamous, 
Primate Stone. 

Even as the most conspicuous supporter of the Irish inte- 
rest during the first half of the century was the Dean of St. 
Patrick's, the two most remarkable supporters of the English 
* interest ' in Ireland in the eighteenth century were both 
Churchmen, the Primate Boulter and the Primate Stone. 
Compared to Stone, Boulter appears an honest and an honour- 
able man. He was only shallow, arrogant, and capricious, 
quite incapable of the slightest sympathy with any people or 
party but his own — a man of some statesmanship, which was 
entirely at the service of the Government, and which never 
allowed him to make any consideration for the wants, the 
wishes, or the sufferings of the Irish people. Perhaps the 
best that can be said of him is that, while belonging to the 
English Church, he did not wholly neglect its teachings and 
its duties, or live a life in direct defiance of its commands — 
which is saying a good deal for such a man in such a time. 
So much cannot be said of his successor in the headship of 
the Irish ecclesiastical system. Primate Stone. The grandson 
of a jailer, he might have deserved admiration for his rise, if 
he had not carried with him into the high places of the Church 
a spirit stained by most of the crimes over which his ancestor 
was appointed warder. In an age of corrupt politics he was 
conspicuous as a corrupt politician ; in a profligate epoch he 
was eminent for profligacy. In the basest days of the Eoman 
Empire he would have been remarkable for the variety of his 
sins ; and the grace of his person, which caused him to be 
styled in savage mockery the ' Beauty of Holiness,' coupled 
with his ingenuity in pandering to the passions of his friends, 
would have made him a serious rival to Petronius at the 
court of Nero. 

Some ten years of persistent but unsuccessful struggling 
-against the evils of the Irish Parliament resulted at last under 
the viceroyalty of Lord Townshend in a distinct triumph for 
the Patriotic party. Up to that time the Irish Parliament, 
unless specially dissolved by the sovereign, lasted for the 



THE PARLIAMENT 25 

whole reign, and George II. 's Parliament was in existence 
for no less than three-and- thirty years — more than a gene- 
ration of men. In 1768, however, the duration of Parlia- 
ment was limited to eight years, and the enthusiasm which 
the measure provoked lent a temporary lustre to Lord Town- 
shend's administration. Lord Townshend — he was the 
brother of that Townshend who made the celebrated ' cham- 
pagne ' speech— had an important mission to fulfil, and a 
measure of popularity was of great importance to aid him in 
fulfilling it. The Irish nobility, with all their faults — and 
they had many and grievous — formed what was in a measure 
an independent Irish party. They might be hungry of gain, 
avaricious of place and profit, corrupt, but they in a measure 
held together and maintained the independence of the Irish 
Parliament. That independence Lord Townshend was com- 
missioned to break up and destroy, but his efforts only broke 
up his own administration and destroyed his short popularity. 
* Baratariana ' literally blew him out of the island. Flood's 
ready pen counted for much in the merits of ' Baratariana.' 
His style was so much admired that his name has been in- 
cluded amongst the many candidates for the honour of having 
written the * Letters of Junius.' It is certain that Flood did 
not write the ' Letters of Junius,' but he rendered his country 
a far greater service in writing the ' Letters of Syndercombe * 
in the 'Baratariana Papers,' which pulverised Lord Town- 
shend. 

In the construction of * Baratariana ' Flood had two col- 
leagues : one, Sir Hercules Langrishe, a man of much merit, 
chiefly remembered as the recipient of Burke's famous letter ; 
the other, the greatest Irish statesman of his age, Henry 
Grattan. Grattan and Flood were at the ' Baratariana ' epoch 
the closest friends. In spite of the disparity between their 
ages, for Flood was some fourteen years older than Grattan, 
they had formed a warm attachment, based upon the simi- 
larity of their tastes, the kinship of their genius, their com- 
mon political ambition, and their common love for their 
country. But what might have been one of the most famous 



26 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

friendships in the world became shortly after the ' Baratariana * 
epoch one of the most famous enmities in the world. 

Mr. Lecky tells in his essay upon Grattan an affecting 
anecdote. After the death of Swift a paper was found in his 
desk containing a list of the Dean's friends, a list which 
Swift, with the melancholy irony of his nature, had classified 
as grateful, ungrateful, and indifferent. It is gratifying, 
though it is not surprising, to learn that the name of Henry 
Grattan occurs three times, and on each occasion it is marked 
as grateful. The verdict of history and the sentiments of his 
country endorse the judgment of the Dean of St. Patrick's, 
There is no man whose name is more truly ' grateful ' to the 
Irish people, and if we cared to pursue the fanciful parallel 
further, we might even assume that there are three special 
episodes in Grattan's life, corresponding with the three entries 
in the list of Swift, which especially endear him to his nation 
— his connection with the Volunteers, his advocacy of the 
claims of his disabled fellow-citizens, and his heroic battle 
against the Act of Union. 

Henry Grattan was born in Dublin, on July 3, 1746. His 
father, who was Eecorder of Dublin, and member of the Irish 
Parliament, was a fierce-tempered, narrow-minded man, of a 
temperament always ready to entertain violent animosities, 
and to adhere stubbornly to them. Such an animosity he 
displayed towards Lucas ; such an animosity he displayed to- 
wards his own son, Henry Grattan, for venturing to entertain 
opinions whose Liberal tendency was highly distasteful to the 
stern Eecorder. When Grattan's father died, his animosity 
towards his son survived him, and manifested itself in his will, 
in which the family mansion was bequeathed to another. A 
small provision was, however, secured for Grattan through 
the influence of his mother, which enabled him to devote 
himself to the career he had marked out for himself. From 
his very boyhood he had distinguished himself by a passionate 
devotion to letters, and of all branches of human art that 
of oratory appeared at an early age to have the most attractions 
for him. After a shining record at Trinity he was called to 



THE PARLIAMENT 27 

the Bar, and crossed St. George's Channel to devote himself 
in London, in the Temple, to the profession which in the 
eighteenth century offered the most prizes to its disciples, the 
legal profession. But it seems certain that his rooms echoed 
more often to the sound of lofty passages of ancient and 
modern eloquence than to the dry repetition of leading cases. 
Oratory was the young man's passion, and in London he was 
able to gratify his passion to the full. London, in the middle 
of the eighteenth century, was a pleasant place enough for 
the stranger — even a dangerously pleasant place for the im- 
prudent and unwary. But to Grattan the chief charm of 
London lay in its suburb of Westminster. He preferred the 
debates in the House of Lords to the attractions of the play- 
house, the ambitions of the great man's levee, or the intrigues 
of the masquerade. The genius of Chatham taught him that 
oratory was as powerful as it had been on the Bema or the 
Eostra, and he listened with a breathless fascination to the 
majestic periods and glowing language of the foremost states- 
man of his time. 

What he heard at Westminster Grattan studied, imitated, 
exercised himself upon in all manner of likely and unhkely 
places. We hear of an alarmed landlady imploring Grattan's 
friends to look after the wild young man who paced his room 
of nights when decent folk were abed, muttering to himself 
and apostrophising some mysterious individual whom he 
hailed as Mr. Speaker. Another even more fantastic story is 
recorded of him. Wandering one day in Windsor Forest he 
came upon an abandoned gibbet. His moody imagination — 
at that time his mind was strangely moody — fired by the 
strange scene, inspired him, and he was declaiming to himself 
energetically before the deserted gallows when his eloquence 
was interrupted by someone touching him on the shoulder, 
and on looking round he was addressed by a passer-by, whom 
the strange spectacle had attracted, with the whimsical query : 
' Pray, sir, how did you get down ? ' a query significantly pointed 
by a gesture in the direction of the tenantless gibbet. 

In 17G8 he returned to Ireland to become the close friend 



28 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

of Henry Flood, and, more gradually, of all the eminent 
men of the day. Charlemont, scholarly, travelled, urbane ; 
Hercules Langrishe, whose services, says Burke, * will never be 
forgotten by a grateful country ' ; Hussey Burgh, eloquent and 
eager ; these and many others were in the nearest circle 
of Grattan's friendships. In such company his political zeal 
could not fail to flourish and his political ambition to in- 
crease. His rare talents were well known ; his friends were 
influential ; a Parliamentary career was essential. In 1775 
he entered Parliament as member for the borough of Charle- 
mont, to which he had been nominated by Lord Charlemont. 
He entered Parliament at a peculiar time — a time which 
afforded him an opportunity of immediately distinguishing 
himself, and his enemies of accusing him of acting ungener- 
ously towards a friend. 

Flood, most unfortunately for his fame, had gratified the 
natural desire of Lord Harcourt by accepting a lucrative 
office. As Vice-Treasurer he was practically muzzled, and 
the indignant Patriots found themselves without a leader. 
Grattan, by natural right stepped into the vacant leadership. 
It is probable that, even if Flood had not accepted office and 
alienated his party, Grattan's superior genius would have 
given him the leadership ; but with Flood swathed and 
silenced by ofhce, Grattan's only possible course and duty 
was to take the lead of the Patriot party, and he can in no 
sense be said to have acted unfairly towards Flood. Flood 
lost the confidence of his followers and his friends by his own 
fault ; he could no longer lead his party, nor would the party 
longer submit to be led by him. Grattan came upon the 
scene in a timely hour to rally the Patriots and carry on the 
important work of opposition. 

It is indeed deeply to be regretted that one result of Flood's 
action was the quarrel which followed between Grattan and 
him. Undoubtedly Flood's action in accepting the Vice- 
Treasurership seemed to Grattan an act of base political 
apostasy. On the other hand. Flood, striving eagerly to 
justify to his own mind his action, smarted at the swift sue- 



THE PARLIAMENT 29 

cess with which Grattan took his place as leader of the Patriots. 
The alliance between the two orators was definitely broken off. 
They had been the closest friends ; they had worked jointly 
on that marvellous ' Baratariana ' which upset Lord Town- 
shend. They had seemed destined by their common genius 
and their common aims to be comrades for life. But the hot 
friendship cooled after Flood's acceptance of office ; it was 
finally severed in the fierce discussion that took place between 
them some years later in the House of Commons, when Flood 
tauntingly described Grattan as a mendicant patriot, and 
Grattan retorted by painting Flood as a traitor in one of the 
most crushing and pitiless pieces of invective that have ever 
belonged to oratory. 



CHAPTER m. 

THE VOLUNTEER S. 

England's difficulty was Ireland's opportunity. Over in the 
American colonies Mr. Washington and his rebels were pressing 
hard upon the troops of King George. More than one garri- 
son had been compelled to surrender, more than one general 
had given up his bright sword to a revolutionary leader. On 
the hither side of the Atlantic the American Hag was scarcely 
less dreaded than at Yorktown and Saratoga. Paul Jones 
had found his world beyond the sapphire promontory of St. 
Bees, and the Bon Homme Bichard was a name of terror still 
by Flamborough and elsewhere. Ireland, drained of troops, 
lay open to invasion. The terrible Paul Jones was drifting 
about the seas ; descents upon Ireland were dreaded ; if such 
descents had been made the island was practically defence- 
less. An alarmed Mayor of Belfast, appealing to the Govern- 
ment for military aid, was informed that no more serious 
and more formidable assistance could be rendered to the 
chief city of the North than might be given by half a troop of 
dismounted cavalry and half a troop of invalids. If the 



30 IRELAND 8TNCB THE VNlON 

Frencli-American enemy would consent to be scared by such a 
muster, well and good ; if not Belfast, and for the matter of 
that, all Ireland, must look to itself. Thereupon Ireland, very 
promptly and decisively, did look to itself. A Militia Act was 
passed empowering the formation of volunteer corps — consist- 
ing, of course, solely of Protestants — for the defence of the 
island. A fever of military enthusiasm swept over the country ; 
north and south and east and west men caught up arms, nomi- 
nally to resist the French, really, though they knew it not, to 
effect one of the greatest constitutional revolutions in history. 
Before a startled Government could realise what was occurring 
sixty thousand men were under arms. For the first time 
since the surrender of Limerick there was an armed force in 
Ireland able and willing to support a national cause. 

Suddenly, almost in the twinkling of an eye, Ireland found 
herself for the first time for generations in the possession of 
a well-armed, well-disciplined, and well-generalled military 
force. The armament that was organised to insure the safety 
of England was destined to achieve the liberties of Ireland. 
England, in the fine words of Hussey Burgh, had sown her 
laws like dragons' teeth, and they had sprung up as armed 
men. All talk of organisation to resist foreign invasion was 
silenced ; in its place the voice of the nation was heard loudly 
calling for the redress of its domestic grievances. Their 
leader was Cbarlemont ; Grattan and Flood were their princi- 
pal colonels ; one of their chief patrons was Frederick Hervey, 
Earl of Bristol and Bishop of Derry. 

James Caulfield, Earl of Cbarlemont, whose name will be 
for ever associated with the struggle of the Volunteers for 
liberty, was a high-minded and accomplished gentleman, 
scholar and statesman. His grave, handsome face, in which 
the air of sternness imparted by the intensely dark eyebrows, 
is softened by the kindly grace of the mouth, is as familiar 
to students of Irish history as the countenance of a friend. 
At the time when the volunteer movement gave him his pro- 
minent place in Irish history he was fifty-four years old. He 
had travelled much in his youth — much, that is, for an age 



THE VOTMNTEBRS 31 

in which the traditions of the Grand Tour still taught men to 
regard the circle of a few Continental towns as extended 
travel. He had been in Sicily ; he had been in Greece, then 
almost an ultima Thule to travellers ; he had been in Constan- 
tinople, and had formed a more favourable notion of the 
' unspeakable Turk ' than was then fashionable ; he had been 
in Egypt — ' that land of wonders,' as he called it— at a time 
when the ' Mille et Une Nuits ' of the ingenious Galland was 
still almost a new book. He numbered among his close per- 
sonal friends in London all that was cultivated, all that was 
brilliant and attractive of that strangely brilliant society. To 
read some of his correspondence is to live over again the age 
of Johnson, and to join fellowship with the famous shades of 
Boswell's biography. Querulous Italian Baretti, dashing 
Topham Beauclerk, Horace Walpole, Dr. Johnson, Goldsmith, 
Burke, Sir Joshua Pieynolds— in a word, all that matchless 
world of men of letters, wits, statesmen, and artists were 
his closest personal friends. He was himself well fitted to 
take his place amongst them as a scholar and an author. His 
favourite study was Italian literature, of which he had a pro- 
found knowledge, and his translations of Petrarch may be 
found pleasing by the most enthusiastic admirer of the lover 
of Laura. ' One of the most accomplished persons of the 
time,' his biographer, Mr. Francis Hardy, calls him, ' and 
certainly as amiable, as patriotic, and truly honest man as 
ever yet existed in any age or in any country.' Such was the 
man whom destiny now called upon to take the lead in one of 
the most remarkable military movements in history, and to 
write his name indelibly in the roll of those who have laboured 
for Irish liberty. 

Seldom, perhaps, has a more eccentric figure strutted upon 
the stage of history than the Earl of Bristol, who was also 
Bishop of Berry. The Bishop was a son of the famous Lord 
Hervey, who wrote those memoirs of the reign of George II. 
which give us so living a picture of the stupidity and brutality 
of the Hanoverian king, and the corruption of his court. The 
memoir- writing Lord Hervey was not a very admirable speci- 



32 IRELAND SINCE THE VNION 

men of the last century gentleman. Pope has gibbeted him 
for ever under the nickname of ' Sporus,' and there is little 
that is either honourable or attractive in the whole of his 
record. His marriage with the beautiful Molly Lepell, for 
whom Chesterfield wrote some famous verses, his absurd duel 
with Pulteney, his quarrel with Pope, his sickly effeminacy, 
which would have better fitted him for some place in the court 
of Heliogabalus than in last century London, which, with all 
its faults, was not unmanly — all these facts are familiar to us 
from the memoirs and the scandals of the Georgian age. 

The son was worthy of the father. As unprincipled, as 
eccentric, as ridiculous as his sire, the Lord Bishop of Derry 
affected to be, on the one hand, a consummate dandy, and, 
on the other, to be not merely a profoundly cultured scholar 
but a great statesman. He had not, however, the physical 
feebleness, nor did he affect the contemptible effeminacy of 
his father. He seemed rather a combination of the typical 
Parisian dbhe of the last century and the conventional soldier 
of fortune. If there were something in him of De Choisy, 
there was something in him also of Dougall Dalgetty, or Sir 
John Hawks wood. He loved splendour of all kinds ; he loved 
gorgeous dresses ; he loved to make himself conspicuous by 
any means and in any manner. He fancied himself to be the 
type of man who can dash off an epigram to a lady's lap-dog 
at one moment and direct the movement of an army at the 
next ; who can sit up all night in a revel with boon com- 
panions and reel from the supper-table to dictate the terms of 
a treaty, or lay down the principles for some new scheme of 
mental or moral philosophy. He thought himself the Csesar 
of the English peerage and the English Church ; he was, in 
fact, a sort of vulgar caricature of Bolingbroke, with all 
Bolingbroke's most besetting weaknesses, and none whatever 
of Bolingbroke's ability. Such was the man who saw in the 
volunteer movement the opportunity for making himself 
especially prominent — who is said to have seen in it the 
opportunity for exchanging the mitre of a bishop for the crown 
of a king. 



THE VOLUNTEERS 83 

On a day early in the October of 1779 three men walked 
by the seashore at Bray, and talked of the strange fortune 
of then country while the autumn haze hung over the grey 
slopes of * the year grown old.' There are few fairer sea- 
views within the compass of the world than that which 
presents itself to the wanderer along the Wicklow coast. 
Not where Parthenope sleeps in the blue embrace of the tide- 
less sea, not where the rock of Palamedes overlooks the 
town of Nauplia, nor where the citadel of the Byzantine 
emperors frowns over the smooth waters of Smyrna Bay can 
a fairer prospect be found, or a nobler theatre for a scene in 
the arenas of freedom. The three men who trod that enchanted 
ground were Grattan, Hussey Burgh, and Daly, and their 
talk was of the Volunteers and the new power they gave to the 
Patriots, and of the coming session of Parliament. That 
morning gave birth to the resolve to demand free trade for 
Ireland, which found its realisation a little later when the 
Irish Parliament accorded its thanks to the volunteers for 
their exertions in ' defence of their country.' From that 
same morning's walk by the sea may be traced the steady 
progress of events which culminated at last in the Convention 
at Dungannon on February 15, 1782, when the Volunteers 
formed themselves into an organised convention for the pur- 
pose of agitating the national wrongs. Graitan was not, in- 
deed, a member of this Convention, but he was heart and soul 
in sympathy with it. With statesmanlike sagacity he saw 
that with the existence of the Volunteers had come the hour 
to heal the hurts of the Irish Parliament, and he seized 
upon the opportunity. He had an army at his back ; the 
Government was still striving with Mr. Washington and his 
rebels ; it was out-manoeuvred and had to give way, and to 
the formal national demand for liberty formulated by Grattan 
in his immortal appeal to the spirit of Swift and the spirit of 
Molyneux. All that Grattan asked for was granted ; the 
hateful sixth Act of George I. was repealed. Grattan had, 
indeed, traced the progress of his country from injury to arms 

D 



34 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION- 

and from arms to liberty, and it was witla no faltering voice 
that he wished her as a nation a perpetual existence. 

Unfortunately for Ireland, the history of her Volunteers 
comes to an end with the opening of the brief chapter of her 
national existence. Unfortunately for Ireland, the genius of 
Grattan was not able to perfect the work it had so nearly ac- 
complished. Grattan, backed by the Volunteers, had obtained 
the repeal of the famous Declaratory Act asserting the depen- 
dence of the Irish Parliament upon the English Parliament. 
In the accomplishment of this repeal Grattan and his friends 
saw the completion of their task ; while Flood and his allies 
saw in it only the preface to a fresh and greater task. Repeal 
of the Declaratory Act was not enough, Flood urged ; they 
must seek to win, while they still had the power to dictate 
terms, a full and formal renunciation of the usurped authority 
over the Irish Parliament. Flood, therefore, was eager for the 
retention of the Volunteers in armed existence to force the 
hand of England's tardy and reluctant justice. Grattan, who 
maintained that England had conceded all that could rightly 
be demanded of her, was no less eager for the immediate dis- 
bandment and dispersal of the Volunteers. He believed that 
their duty was done, and he saw in their further existence a 
Praetorian menace to the newly-acquired liberties which they 
had been so powerful in obtaining. Grattan carried his point ; 
the full and complete renunciation which Flood desired was 
not won. Flood failed, too, in carrying the Volunteer Reform 
Bill for enlarging the franchise, and the Volunteers disbanded 
and dispersed. Wonderful as was the way in which they had 
come into existence, their dispersal was almost as wonder- 
ful. That vast body of men who yesterday were in arms to 
achieve their country's freedom, to-day had vanished, and left 
* not a wrack behind.' The citizen army had been absorbed 
into civil life. * The earth has bubbles as the water has, 
and these are of them,' we may imagine some English states- 
man saying, as the formidable array that had proved so 
threatening for a season melted out of existence at the bidding 
of Grattan. 



THE VOLUNTEERS 35 

The rise of the Volunteers and the repeal of the sixth Act 
of George I. had given triumph into Grattan's hands. But 
at the moment when the desires of the Patriot party had 
been apparently fulfilled the popularity of Grattan, by a 
curious example of the law of historical reaction, began to 
wane, and that of Flood, which had clouded over ever since 
his acceptance of office from Lord Harcourt's hands, began to 
wax anew. The difference of opinion between the two great 
leaders is eminently characteristic of their respective natures. 
Grattan maintained that by the repeal of the Declaratory Act 
England had sufficiently and practically abandoned her supre- 
macy over the Irish Parliament. Flood maintained that the 
mere repeal of the Declaratory Act was not enough without a 
formal renunciation of the principle upon which that Declara- 
tory Act had been based. Here Gratian showed a certain 
generous confidence in his opponents which Flood believed to 
be misplaced. Grattan, too, was convinced of the imperative 
necessity of immediately dissolving and dispersing the Volun- 
teers. Their work, he contended, had been happily accom- 
plished ; their further existence would be a standing peril to 
the independence of Parliament and the liberties of the people. 
Flood, on the other hand, urged that Ireland had not yet 
accomplished much, that her independent Parliament was in 
sore need of reform, and that a nation in cnns Avas in the 
only position in which it could reasonably hope to accom- 
plish that reform in the face of so many and so powerful 
antagonists. Here, again, Grattan's was the more generous, 
Flood's the shrewder view of the situation. 

Reviewing the opinions of the two men, it is difficult to 
avoid the impression that it would have been happier for 
Ireland if Flood had carried his point, while it is scarcely less 
difficult not to feel greater admiration for the loftier theories of 
Grattan. If the world had been all Grattans, then Grattan's 
pure and high-minded principles would have been best for the 
welfare of the country. But, as the world concained only one 
Grattan, it is ten thousand pities that the advice of Flood was 
not followed, and that the Volunteers were not kept in exist- 



36 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

ence, at least until some of the most crying needs of reform 
were satisfied. It is one of those cases in which, while the 
event proved Flood to have been in the right, we could wish 
for the honour of humanity that time should have justified 
Grattan. 

Mr. Lecky thoroughly supports Flood. ' Had he succeeded,' 
he says, ' he would have placed the independence of Ireland 
on the broad basis of the people's will ; he would have forti- 
fied and completed the glorious work that he had himself 
begun, and he would have averted a series of calamities which 
have not even yet spent their force. We should never have 
known the long night of corruption that overcast the splendour 
of Irish liberty. The blood of 1798 might never have flowed. 
The Legislative Union would never have been consummated, 
or, if there had been a Union, it would have been effected by 
the will of the people, and not by the treachery of their re- 
presentatives, and it would have been remembered only with 
gratitude or with content.' 

After the failure of his Eeform Bill and the disbandment 
of the Volunteers, Flood retired from the Irish Parliament in 
despair, and, crossing the sea, sought and found a seat in the 
English Parliament. But, as Grattan said, * he was an oak 
of the forest too great and too old to be transplanted at fifty.' 
The prematurely-aged man, with his countenance disfigured 
by disease, and his temperament embittered by long years of 
unpopularity, misunderstanding, and strife, was a very dif- 
ferent being from the handsome, easy-tempered, happy-minded 
young man who, a quarter of a century before, had entered 
the Irish Parliament under such favourable auspices. His 
first speech in the English House of Commons was, unhappily, 
made in an Indian debate upon a theme of which he knew 
little, and though the House soon crowded to hear the renowned 
orator, the effect was disappointing, and Flood's discomfiture 
was rendered more painful by a fierce and contemptuous attack 
which was made upon him by another member the moment 
he sat down. After that Flood spoke seldom in Parliament, 
and after a while he retired from political life altogether, a 



THE VOLUNTEERS 37 

disappointed, broken man. He died at his estate at Farmley, 
near Kilkenny, on December 2, 1791. He may be considered 
happy in escaping, even by this too early death, from the 
horrors of ninety-eight and the degradation of the Union, 
horrors and degradation which his shrewdness foresaw, and 
which his policy would have avoided. 

When Grattan lay upon his death-bed, after his last heroic 
attempt to plead the cause of the Catholics at Westminster, 
some of his latest words were uttered in generous praise of 
the man who had been his closest friend and fiercest enemy ; 
who had been for long his rival in oratory and in the affections 
of the Irish people ; who was almost his peer in genius — 
Henry Flood. Grattan had outlived Flood by the length of 
nearly a generation of men ; unlike too many statesmen, he 
had outlived also the passions and animosities of his hot man- 
hood, and could afford, in his ultimate hour, to speak with 
decorous admiration of the man whom he had once confronted 
pistol in hand, whom he had more than once believed it his 
duty to denounce with all the vehemence and all the vigour 
of which he was capable. 

The wild Bishop of Derry was very indignant at the dis- 
persal of the Volunteers. His occuToation was gone. He had 
little or no influence with the Volunteers, but it delighted him 
to believe that he was all-potent in the councih that directed 
them. He saw in himself the chosen leader of a great 
rebellion, holding in the hollow of his hand the destinies of 
nations, arbitrating between peace and war, and settling the 
Parliamentary independence of Ireland as easily as the 
appointment to a living. He drifted in disgust out of Dublin 
and out of history. He lived for a while in Naples a mad, 
foolish life, and died in Eome in 1803. Wiser heads and 
better hearts than the Bishop of Derry regretted the disband- 
ment of the Volunteers, Flood was more far-seeing than 
Grattan in his policy. Englishmen and Irishmen, who are 
learning to agree upon so many great questions, may very well 
be agreed upon this point, that it would have been well to 
keep the Volunteers in existence yet a while. Had Flood's 



38 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

advice been followed it is possible that Ireland and England 
might at this moment be proud of the reformed Parliament; 
that Irishmen and Englishmen would have had no need to 
speak of ninety- eight. 

Certain English statesmen are fond of asserting in the 
present day that Ireland is in reality devotedly attached to 
the English connection in its present form ; that it is only 
the harsh voices of a discontented few which make themselves 
heard with the greater distinctness because of the general peace 
and contentment of the country/ Yet the statesmen who 
deceive their followers, if not themselves, by such pitiful 
pretences, would be horrified at the bare idea of allowing 
Irishmen again to organise a volunteer force, to publicly arm 
and drill, to unite in vast bodies at great military conventions. 
Luckily for Ireland, she no longer needs such volunteers to 
accomplish her purpose of a restored Parliament. In the 
unconquerable nationality of her children, in her friendship 
with true English Liberalism, in the determination and 
fidehty of her delegates to the Enghsh Parliament, in the 
wisdom of her leader, in the genius of the great English 
statesman who has eclipsed the fame of Fox and made him- 
self the founder of a true union between the two divided 
countries, in the sympathy and the honest desire for justice 
of the English people, lie Ireland's hope and Ireland's cer- 
tainty of perfecting the work of constitutional freedom which 
was begun by the Volunteers of 1782. 



CHAPTEE IV. 

NINETY-EIGHT. 

The Parliament which Grattan and the Volunteers had 
created did much that was worthy of its founders, but the 
difficulties against which it had to struggle were too severe to 
allow the liberty-tree which had been planted to come to any- 
thiiig like a full maturity. Viceroy after viceroy was sent 



NINETY-EIGHT 39 

over to counteract by all the means in his power — and a 
viceroy in those days had many means — the gradual revival 
of Irish independence. The vast system of corruption which 
then existed rendered such efforts on the part of the viceroy 
comparatively easy, and practically placed the majority in the 
House of Commons in the hollow of his hand. Discontent 
and distress reigned over the greater part of the country. 
Beligious feuds had broken out in the North, owing to the 
continued oppression of the supporters of the Ascendency 
party, who could not be induced to recognise the new spirit 
of toleration for the Catholic majority, which was gradually 
making its way into the political creed of the day. The feud, 
which gradually spread, was augmented and intensified by 
the existing system of tithes. The unpopular clergy of the 
Established Church paid little heed to their benefices. They 
left their very scanty congregations to be looked after by some 
unhappy curate, and followed themselves the majority of the 
landlord party in becoming absentees, and leaving to the 
middlemen and tithe-proctors the odious task of extorting 
from the suffering and reluctant Catholic population the 
heavy tithes enforced for the maintenance of the dominant 
Church. 

It is small wonder that under circumstances like these 
there were disturbances in various parts of the country, and 
that secret and mysterious organisations came into existence 
under the guidance of an occult and potent Captain Eock, to 
protect the peasant against the tithe-proctor and the absentee 
clergyman. The Government, as usual, met the discontent 
and disaffection, which was engendered by misery, with 
coercion, and not with redress. Savage restrictive enact- 
ments were called into existence to curb the agitation which 
want and oppression had created. Under such circumstances, 
those Irish politicians who loved their country may well have 
thought that the work accomplished by the Volunteers was 
not sufficient, and it was time again to make an effort to 
protect the threatened rights and liberties of their country. 

There was much to encourage a hopeful belief in the 



40 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

success of any cause which had Eight and Liberty for its watch- 
words. Just then France was giving, as she gave half a 
century later, the signal to Ireland to make an effort for self- 
redress. The French Eevolution had just broken out. Its 
brilliant success had fascinated the minds of ardent politicians, 
whose better natures had not yet been revolted by the 
atrocities which later on disgraced and degraded it. When 
politicians of no very advanced temper, like Lord Charlemont 
and the members of the Whig Club, were celebrating with 
triumphant banquets the anniversary of the fall of the Bastille, 
and sending round such toasts as ' The Eevolution ' and ' The 
Eights of Man,' it is scarcely matter for marvel that younger 
and more impetuous spirits should have been fired by the 
example of democratic Paris, and thought that what the 
revolutionary clubs had accomplished across the Channel 
could be accomplished equally well in Dublin. 

Grattan's first dream had been to obtain a free Parliament ; 
his second was to make that Parhament worthy of its own 
freedom by recognising the right to liberty of the Catholics 
of Ireland. Catholic Emancipation was now the object of 
Grattan's ambition. The horrors of the Penal Code were no 
longer, indeed, enforced in all their naked brutality against 
the majority of the people of Ireland. In the words of Mr. 
Lecky, ' the Code perished at last by its own atrocity.' Its 
malignant ingenuity in the end defeated itself ; to carry out 
with perfection and persistence the full clauses of that Code 
would have required the strength of a whole community as 
perverted as the original framers of the laws. Happily for 
human nature, no such corrupt community was to be found. 
The Irish Protestants sickened of the provisions of the Penal 
Code. Through the strength of public opinion most of its 
provisions fell into disuse, and only lingered in nominal 
existence on the pages of the statute-book. Even from the 
statute-book the clauses of the Penal Code were one by one 
being slowly effaced. In 1768 a Bill to modify the provisions 
of the Penal Code was passed in the Irish House of Commons 
and defeated in the English House, PvOliof Bills cf various 



NINETY-EIGHT 41 

kinds were passed in 1774, 1778, 1782, and 1792. The effect 
of these measures was to restore to the Irish Cathohcs a large 
number of those rights and privileges of citizenship of which 
they had been so ruthlessly deprived. Most — but not all, nor 
the most important. The right to vote for representatives in 
Parliament, the right to enter Parliament, and the right to ad- 
vancement in law or in arms were still sternly denied to them. 

There was at this time a young barrister in Ireland who 
was looked upon by his family and by his frierjds as rather a 
■ hopeless kind of person. He had not employed his time at 
the University with that diligence which leads to the capture 
of academic honours, he had not devoted himself to his pro- 
fession of the Bar with that patience and endurance which 
afforded any prospects of a Lord Chancellorship. He seemed 
to the sensible, prudent people with whom he came in contact 
to be a hopelessly lazy, impracticable young man, a dreamer 
of absurd dreams, with his head stuffed with fantastic political 
notions which no right-minded person could tolerate, or, 
indeed, understand ; the sort of young man, in fact, who never 
would come to anything, or bring credit upon his people. 
His name was Theobald Wolfe Tone. To Theobald Wolfe 
Tone, discontented with his lot, conscious, no doubt, of the 
waste of his fine genius in the narrow pursuits and possibilities 
of his daily life, and indignant at the oppression and injustice 
endured by his countrymen, the new ideas that were in the 
air very naturally commended themselves. It occurred to 
him that a union effected between the rising democracy in tlie 
North of Ireland with the long down-trodden and ignored 
Catholic interest might result in the creation of a formidable 
political party. He sketched out this idea in a pamphlet, and 
then went to Belfast and founded there a small association — 
destined to become one of the most famous organisations for 
political purposes ever founded — called the Society of United 
Irishmen. 

Tone's pamphlet and Tone's organisation were the be- 
ginning of a nevN^ era. A branch society was immediately 
formed in Dublin, and joined by many conspicuous poHticians. 



42 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Branches, too, were established in various parts of Ulster, and 
adherents came in with great rapidity. The objects of the 
Society would not seem to us of to-day to be very revolutionary, 
although they sounded horridly in the ears of the Ascendency. 
Every member of the United Irishmen pledged himself to use 
all his abilities to obtain an impartial and adequate represen- 
tation of the Irish nation in Parliament, and to do all that lay 
in his power to forward a union of affection and of interest 
among Irishmen of all religious persuasions. 

It must not be supposed, though it is too often imagined, 
that Wolfe Tone started with the desire of severing his coun- 
try from all connection with England. Mr. Gladstone, in a 
recent remarkable speech, said very truly : ' If there is an Irish 
name associated with the idea of separation more than any 
other name, it is the name of Wolfe Tone ; but in the year 
1791 Wolfe Tone declared that he was not favourable to sepa- 
ration from the British Crown. He declared then, what 
O'Connell declared afterwards in very clear terms, that the 
two countries were in his view to be united by the golden link 
of the Crown.' 

It was at once resolved to hold a convention in Dublin 
after the fashion of the Volunteer Convention. On December 
2, 1792, the convention met in Taylor's Hall, Back Lane, 
Dublin, and five delegates were chosen to present a petition 
to the king, praying for the restoration of his Koman Catholic 
subjects to the rights and privileges of the constitution. A 
month later the five delegates gave their petition into the 
hands of his Majesty, and the result was the Eoman Catholic 
Relief Bill of 1793. So much the Government conceded to the 
new organisation, and to the feeling of alarm and insecurity 
caused by the rapid strides of the Ee volution in France. But 
if the Government conceded something to the Back Lane Par- 
liament, as it was called, with one hand, it struck at the exis- 
tence of that body with the other. 

A relief measure of any kind is always accompanied in the 
history of Ireland with a coercion measure ; and on this occa- 
sion the Catholic Belief Bill came into the world accompanied 



NINETY-EIGHT 43 

by three coercive measures, one of wliicli — the Convention 
Act— was specially framed to prevent the possibility of any 
fm'ther Back Lane Parliaments dictating terms to the Govern- 
ment. As usual, coercive measures increased the disturbances 
in the country. United Irishmen became more active than 
ever in spreading their propaganda. And then the Govern- 
ment struck a decided blow at the new and dangerous body. 
Mr. Simon Butler, a brother of Lord Mountgarret and chair- 
man of the United Irishmen, and Oliver Bond, were arrested, 
imprisoned, and fined. Hamilton Eowan, the secretary of the 
body, was arrested, imprisoned, and fined, but succeeded in 
escaping from prison to America. Wolfe Tone was to have 
been prosecuted, but, through the influence of powerful 
friends, he was allowed to go to America with his wife and 
family. Taylor's Hall, the Back Lane Parliament, was broken 
into by the police, and all the papers and United Irishmen 
were seized. An English clergyman named Jackson, who 
had joined the United Irishmen, was tried for treason in 
attempting to bring about an alliance with France. He 
would have been convicted on the evidence of the usual, and, 
indeed, inevitable informer, but he anticipated his judgment 
by committing suicide. The Government was under the fond 
impression that it had stamped out United Irishmen for good 
and all. 

The very effort to suppress the United Irishmen, however, 
only gave it a newer and more dangerous existence. It had 
hitherto been a legal and constitutional body, acting, in accord- 
ance with the rights of every citizen, for the amelioration of 
the constitution ; it was now to become a great secret society, 
spreading its influence into every part of Ireland, and having 
for its object the definite destruction of English dominion in 
Ireland, and the establishment of an Irish republic. Wolfe 
Tone, indeed, had gone away, in temporary exile, into the 
United States ; but other and no less important leaders had 
joined the movement and filled his place. Wolfe Tone's 
absence was only temporary. He had said to a friend, as he 
was leaving Ireland, that he was going to France by way of 



44 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

America. To Richard Lalor Sheil, it seems surprising that 
Tone should have cherished in the security and prosperity of 
his American home the revolutionary doctrines which drove 
him into exile. ' There,' says Sheil, 'in the bosom of his 
family, with a wife whom he adored, and children who shared 
in his idolatry for their incomparable mother, he might have 
had a long and prosperous life, if he knew how to form a just 
estimate of felicity, and could have appreciated the opportu- 
nities of happiness with which he was encompassed.' Sheil 
was a great orator, but he was not capable of understanding 
the principles which animated the nature of a man like Wolfe 
Tone. It evidently surprised him that an Irishman, with the 
opportunity of a comfortable and peaceful home in a foreign 
country, should really risk his welfare and his life for such 
a dream as patriotism— ' perverted patriotism,' he calls the 
generous heroism which sent Wolfe Tone back from America 
to France, to Ireland and to his death. 

Tone might well, however, have found encouragement for 
his action in the treatment received by Irish statesmanship of 
the most constitutional type. Grattan made himself the 
mouthpiece of a movement organised by the Irish Catholics 
in 1793, and having for its object the removal of these final 
disabilities. One of them Grattan succeeded in abolishing. 
In 1793, thanks to his efforts and his eloquence, the Catholics 
were admitted to the elective franchise. But in his second 
effort to allow Catholics to be elected to Parliament, Grattan 
failed. That failure and the recall of Lord Fitzwilliam pre- 
cipitated the rebellion of ninety-eight. Despairing of the 
condition of his country, unable to sympathise either with the 
party of rebellion or the party of repression, Grattan retired 
from political life. 

The United Irishmen had found other leaders during 
Wolfe Tone's absence. Of these the most conspicuous and 
the most famous was ' the gallant and seditious Geraldine,' 
who is dear to so many Irish national songs as ' Lord Edward.' 
Lord Edward Fitzgerald came of an ancient family, which 
on one side traced its descent from a proud Italian house, and 



NINETY- ETGHT 45 

on the other was hnked with the Hne of the Stuarts. The 
courtly poet, Surrey, who had the misfortune to Hve under a 
monarch hke Henry VIII., had loved a daughter of the house 
of Geraldine, and has devoted to her praise sonnets almost as 
sweetas those that were written in the native Tuscan of herrace. 
It was of the Irish Geraldines that the phrase had come into 
existence that they were * more Irish than the Irish them- 
selves ; ' and more than one member of that brave and illus- 
trious household had borne testimony to the truth of the say- 
ing with his blood. Latterly, however, the Geraldines had 
fallen away from their fame, and had ceased to play a con- 
spicuous part in history. It was reserved for a young man, 
a soldier in the service of England, who had fought and bled 
in the American war, to revive the old glories of his race, and 
to lend them a brighter lustre. 

Lord Edward Fitzgerald was almost the ideal hero of 
romance : young, handsoixe, brilliant, gallant, he shines in 
the darkness of the darkest pages in Irish history like the 
creation of a poet. It is easy to understand how Lord Byron 
was captivated by his story and by his untimely fate, and saw 
in him a magnificent subject for some future historical novel. 
There is a story, but we do not believe it, that Lord Edward 
Fitzgerald's beauty, bravery, and genius, were the means of 
inflicting a pang upon one of the most charming women of 
her time, and of causing a wrong to one of the greatest and 
most gifted of Irishmen. The legend is that Sheridan's 
beautiful and devoted wife fell hopelessly in love with Lord 
Edward Fitzgerald, and that her ill-fated passion hastened 
her death. . Moore, however, denies the story strongly, and 
there is no reason for us to believe that the woman who was 
fortunate enough to have secured the homage and affection of 
Richard Brinsley Sheridan should have ever turned her heart 
towards another object, even were that another Irishman so 
handsome, so heroic, so accomplished as Edward Fitzgerald. 
Lord Edward Fitzgerald himself fell deeply in love with and 
married the fair and mysterious Pamela, who, in spite of 
the statements of Madame de Genlis, there is no reason 



46 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

now to doubt was indeed the daughter of PhiHppe EgaHte. 
Fitzgerald adored his young and beautiful wife, who was, per- 
haps, hardly worthy of the devotion of that noble heart. It 
is curious to reflect that the three women whose names are 
associated with the three greatest figures of that revolutionary 
movement — the wife of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, the wife of 
Wolfe Tone, and the affianced bride of Kobert Emmet- 
should each have injured the memory of the great men with 
whose lives they were associated by consenting to accept the 
love and names of others. The widow of Fitzgerald, the 
widow of Tone, and the betrothed of Emmet might well have 
been proud to have carried to their graves the names by which 
they were known to their patriot lovers. 

The French Eevolution had captivated Fitzgerald as it 
attracted Wolfe Tone. One small fact illustrates in a curious 
way the difference in the character of the two revolutionary 
leaders. When the United Irishmen in their early days 
insisted upon addressing one another after the fashion of 
republican Paris as ' citizen,' Wolfe Tone protested strongly 
against the innovation, very much as Mirabeau had himself 
protested against it. ' With your citizen, Eiquetti,' said 
Mirabeau, ' you have perplexed all Europe.' Wolfe Tone 
protested scarcely less vehemently against the use of a title 
which did not really alter the relative positions of those who 
used it. But the imagination of Fitzgerald, on the other 
hand, was seized by the picturesque and poetic notions of 
equality, and he insisted at once upon dropping his own 
courtesy title and being greeted and addressed merely as 
Citizen Edward Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald's republicanism, his 
admiration of the Revolution, and his alliance with the 
daughter of Philippe Egalite earned for him the anger of his 
kinsmen and of his class, and the removal of his name from 
the roll of the British army. He threw himself with enthu- 
siasm into the cause of the United Irishmen, worked vigorously 
with Oliver Bond and Thomas Addis Emmet and MacNevin 
and the other leaders of the movement, and went over to 
France on a mission to the Republican Directory. 



NINETY-EIGHT 47 

Once again his alliance with the House of Orleans was 
injurious to him. The French Directory prohibited him from 
entering France, and he remained at Hamburg while other 
emissaries went to point out to the Eepublican Government 
the possibility of a French invasion of Ireland. Wolfe Tone, 
true to his promise of going to France by America, had now 
once more made his appearance in Europe. The eloquence 
and the arguments of the United Irishmen impressed the 
French Directory, and an army of invasion was organised 
under the command of General Hoche. But disaster attended 
upon all the attempts to land a French army in Ireland. The 
winds and waves, which had protected England against the 
Invincible Armada, protected her now against two successive 
expeditions. A third expedition was destined to be turned, 
not against England, but against Egypt. 

In Ireland, in the meantime, things were going from bad 
to worse ; the country was being administered by a system of 
savage repression which recalled the worst atrocities of the 
Cromwellian occupation. Martial law was made the excuse 
for every system of lawlessness, and the Catholic population 
were subjected to every species of outrage, of insult, and of 
injury. The actions of the United Irishmen were perfectly 
familiar to the Government. The organisation was literally 
infested with spies. Every needy placeman, every broken- 
down officer, every desperate adventurer, every scoundrel who 
could find no other occupation, joined the association, and 
made himself a hateful livelihood by selling its secrets to the 
Government. The Government could at any time have 
seized upon the principal leaders of the organisation ; but the 
Government was playing a deeper game. It was determined 
to force the movement into open insurrection, in order that 
it might be justified in crushing it out more completely. 
Other Governments since that time have pursued the same 
policy, in days much nearer to our own. The policy was 
completely successful in the case of the United Irishmen. 

Visitors to Dublin to-day, who wander within Trinity, may 
often have pointed out to them by their friends an elderly 



48 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

man of scholastic appearance and academic garb, authpr of 

* Who Fears to Speak of Ninety-eight ? ' There is something 
very cmdous about the cloistered life of a man who gave to a 
national movement one of its most powerful inspirations, 
who enriched the literature of Irish discontent with one of 
the most famous of rebellious ballads. For more than forty 
years ' The Memory of the Dead ' has been dear to the 
hearts of Irishmen in every part of the world. When it was 
written, when it first appeared in the pages of the Nation, 
some of the ' brave, the faithful, and the few ' still lived and 
looked upon the sun. In foreign exile the hearts of Arthur 
O'Connor, and Miles Byrne, of Wexford, still beat responsive 
to the aspirations of Irish liberty. In the long interval two 
fresh revolutionary efforts have been made. Through all this 
great gap of time the author of the seditious ballad which has 

* played so brave a part ' has lived his quiet, studious life, in 
self-chosen exile from the great world of politics, oblivious of 
the fierce emotions and strong passions which he did so much 
to stimulate. A Tyrtasus for ten minutes, he gave Ireland 
an anthem, and then retired for ever into scholastic obscurity. 
Eouget de Lisle, singing his one wild war song, which was 
destined to become the voice not of one, but of a hundred 
revolutions, and straightway sliding back again into nothing- 
ness, an idle writer of foolish verses, known now only to the 
curious, finds his historical parallel in this professor of 
Trinity who was once the poet of rebellion. ' The Memory 
of the Dead ' was only a tour de force to him ; it was destined 
to become the hymn, the anthem, and the dirge of millions 
of his countrymen. 

Certainly the Government did everything in its power to 
make ' Ninety-eight ' an abiding memory wdth the Irish people. 
It had bided its time patiently until it thought the moment had 
come for swooping upon the United Irishmen and forcing a 
futile insurrection. It nursed revolution with the cruel care 
of the step-mother of a fairy tale. The country was ripe for 
revolt. The infamies of Major Sirr's gang had roused the 
anger and the indignation of others than revolutionary leaders. 



NINETY-EIGHT 49 

The words, * Kemember Orr ! ' lingered on the hps of men who 
had never taken a secret oath. Men who might have been 
supposed to be friendly to the English Government were forced 
into horrified protestations against the atrocities which were 
being committed in the Government's name. Lord Moira, an 
Irish nobleman, who afterwards rose to high distinction in 
the English colonial service, spoke vehemently and earnestly 
against the way in which Ireland was being goaded into revo- 
lution. But Iris protest was met and answered by Black Jack 
Fitzgibbon, the hated Lord Clare, perhaps the basest of the 
many base tools that Pitt chose to employ against the Irish 
people. Sir Ralph Abercrombie was sent over to take com- 
mand of the troops in Ireland, and was so disgusted with the 
disorder, the riot, and the undisciplined rutijanism of the 
soldiers placed under him, that he made a strong effort to 
curb their brutality ; and when his action was not supported 
by the Home Government, he promptly resigned his command. 
The Government found a readier instrument in his successor, 
General Lake ; and the picketing, the flogging, the torturing, 
and the bloodshed went on merrily as before. A recipe to 
make a rebel, which was popular in those days among 
Nationalists, ran thus : ' Take a loyal subject, uninfluenced 
by title, place, or pension : burn his house over his head ; let 
the soldiery exercise every species of insult and barbarity 
towards his helpless family, and march away with the plunder 
of every part of his property they choose to save from the 
flames.' The recipe was excellent, and effected the purpose 
of the Government in enforcing the rebellion. 

The Government now prepared to strike their final blow. 
Their favourite spy at the time was Thomas Reynolds, of 
Kilkea, the brother-in-law of Tone's wife, a man deep in the 
secrets of the United Irishmen. On March 12, 1798, the 
Dublm authorities, acting on the information of Reynolds, 
made a descent upon Oliver Bond's house, got in by means of 
the password supplied by the traitor, and seized Bond and 
thirteen delegates, with the most important papers of the 
United Irishmen. Lord Edward Fitzgerald was on his way 

E 



50 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

to Bond's house when he received wEtrning, and hid himself 
until he could head the general rising which was now resolved 
upon. But the Government spies were more than a match 
for the United Irishmen. Captain Armstrong, of the King's 
County Militia, who afterwards sent the brothers Sheares to 
the gallows, was, like Reynolds, deep in the councils of the 
United Irishmen, and faithfully transmitted to the Govern- 
ment all the plans of the proposed rising. Another traitor, 
Francis Higgins, the owner of the Freemaii's Journal, sent 
word to the Castle that Fitzgerald was hiding in a house in 
Thomas Street. Major Sirr and a body of soldiers surrounded 
the house, and forced their way into the bedroom where Lord 
Edward was waiting unsuspicious of danger. Lord Edward 
knew well enough that there was small hope for a revolutionary 
leader who fell into the hands of the Government, and he 
offered a desperate resistance. In the narrow room he 
struggled with his assailants till the walls and the floor were 
splashed with his blood, and the blood of his enemies ; and it 
w^as not until he had wounded one of his adversaries to the 
death, and was himself wounded in many places, that the 
soldiers were enabled to overpower him, and carry him to 
prison. In the prison Lord Edward Fitzgerald died of his 
wounds, and the revolutionary movement lost in him one of 
the bravest, the noblest, and the ablest of its leaders. To this 
day strangers in Dublin seek eagerly for the place where he 
met his death. Thomas Francis Meagher, in one of the finest 
of his speeches, speaks of ' the ducal palace in this city, where 
the memory of the gallant and seditious Geraldine enhances 
more than royal favour the splendour of his race.' The 
memory of Edward Fitzgerald, however, is more closely 
associated with that small, dismal room in Thomas Street, in 
which the last Geraldine who played any part in Irish history 
met his death. 

The great insurrection which had been schemed out in the 
brain of Fitzgerald and his friends was destined to be dissi- 
pated in a series of untimely and unsuccessful local risings, 
the chief of which took place in Wexford. The rebels fought 



NINETY-EIGHT 51 

bravely, and in some parts, for a time, with something Hke 
success ; but the odds against them were too heavy, and the 
revolution was crushed out with pitiless severity. The Catho- 
lic clergy played a conspicuous part in the rising. Many of 
them entered the rebel ranks, and led the rebel bands to 
action. Father John Murphy, Father Philip Eoche, and 
Father Michael Murphy, were conspicuous among the revo- 
lutionary priesthood. The men who followed Father Michael 
Murphy believed him to be invulnerable ; but he was killed at 
last by a cannon-ball at the fight of Arklow. Father Philip 
Eoche also fell in battle. Father John Murphy, more famous 
perhaps than either of the others, and less fortunate in his 
fate, was captured and hanged. The assistance which the 
revolutionary party had hoped for from France came to 
nothing. A few troops, indeed, under General Humbert, did 
land in Killala Bay ; but they were surrounded by the English 
at Ballynamuck, and compelled to surrender at discretion. 
The French soldiers were made prisoners of war ; the unhappy 
peasants who were with them were slaughtered without mercy. 
The rebellion of ninety-eight was over. Many of its leaders 
died on the gallows. Bagenal Harvey, of Bargy Castle, and 
Anthony Perry, both Protestant gentlemen of fortune and 
position, who had been forced into the rebellion by the perse- 
cution of Government, were hanged. The two brothers 
Sheares were hanged. M'Cann was hanged. Of the other 
leaders, Oliver Bond died in Newgate ; Arthiu^ O'Connor, 
Thomas Addis Emmet, and MacNevin were banished. Arthur 
O'Connor entered the French service, and lived long enough 
to send, nearly half a century later, kindly messages of sym- 
pathy and encouragement to a subsequent body of revolution- 
aries—the Young Irelanders. 

Great and unjust use has been made by the enemies of 
Ireland of some unhappy episodes in the history of the 
rising. It has surprised certain English historians beyond 
measure that a people goaded into frenzy by outrage, torture, 
insult, and oppression of every kind, should when their hour 
came have attempted some reprisals. The marvel rather is 

E 2 



52 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

that so few reprisals have to be recorded. The Irish historian 
would be, indeed, happy who could say that rebel cause was 
unstained by other than the inevitable bloodshed of war. 
Unfortunately this cannot be said. ' Blood will have blood,' 
says Macbeth. It is not surprising that some fierce revenge 
was taken for the men who had been flogged, tortured, and 
murdered ; for the women who had been outraged by a 
licentious and brutal soldiery. 

Mr. Froude, who is at once the most famous and the 
most unfair of anti-Irish historians, seems almost paralysed 
with amazement because ignorant and unhappy men treated 
with merciless cruelty should have been cruel in their turn 
to their oppressors. Another historian of a very different 
temper from Mr. Froude has criticised Mr. Froude in 
language which it will be well to borrow. He sternly and 
justly condemns the atrocities that were committed by some 
of the rebels, but he goes on : ' An impartial historian would 
not have forgotten that they were perpetrated by undisciplined 
men, driven to madness by a long course of savage cruelties, 
and in most cases without the knowledge or approval of their 
leaders ; and from the beginning of the struggle the yeomen 
rarely gave quarter to the rebels ; that with the one horrible 
exception of Scullabogue, the rebels in their treatment of 
women contrasted most favourably and most remarkably with 
the troops, and that one of the earliest episodes of the struggle 
was the butchery, near Kildare, of 350 insurgents who had 
surrendered on the express promise that their lives should 
be spared.' 

Even of Scullabogue itself another writer, the Honourable 
Lewis Wingfield, has written in his powerful novel, ' My 
Lords of Strogue,' after a fashion and with a temperance rare 
in those who write for an English audience—' the three hun- 
dred innocent women and children had been consumed as a 
holocaust on the altar of his Majesty King George, who, large- 
minded man, was consistently without mercy for the Isle 
which God had given to his keeping ; who was pitiless for the 
professors of a faith which did not agree with his own fancy ; 



NINETY-Ei GHi 53 

who, by reason of his policy regarding Ireland, must be held 
accountable for the tragedy which took place on June 5 
within the barn of Scullabogue.' 

If there had been during the last eighty- five years more 
thinkers and writers in England like Mr. Lewis Wingfield and 
like Mr. Lecky, in the temper in which he wrote ' Leaders of 
Public Opinion in Ireland,' and less like Mr. Froude, the 
quarrel between the two nations would not be where it is 
to-day. 

It must never be forgotten by the serious student of ninety- 
eight that the rising was in no sense a religious war. The 
United Irishmen were organised openly first, and secretly 
afterwards, by Protestants ; the most conspicuous leaders of 
the revolution were Protestants ; some of its most famous 
martyrs were Protestants. Not only was the struggle not one 
of creed against creed, of Catholic against Protestant, but 
large numbers of Catholics were strongly opposed to the 
rebellion, and in many cases took active measures against it. 
Something of the character of a religious war was lent to the 
struggle in Wexford by the efforts of the Orangemen, but the 
movement as a whole was never of this complexion. The 
Irish Catholic race have never shown the slightest intolerance 
for the professors of the creed under whose special sanction 
the Penal Laws were promulgated. They have welcomed 
Protestant leaders in successive struggles, from the days of 
Grattan to the days of Parnell. The liberty of conscience 
which they asked for themselves, they have never sought to 
deny others. Ninety-eight, like the movements which suc- 
ceeded it, was a national movement, an uprising against 
burdens too bitter to bear, and it was sympathised with and 
supported by Irishmen of all religious denominations, bound 
together by common injuries and a common desire to redress 
them. 

There was still one more scene to be played out in the 
melancholy drama of ninety-eight. Some French ships were 
sent to Ireland, but were attacked by an English squadron 
before a landing could be effected. After a long and desperate 



54 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

battle the French were hopelessly defeated. A large number 
of French officers who were taken prisoners were brought to 
Lord Cavan's house on Lough Swilly. Among the guests there 
was Sir (i-eorge Hill. Looking into the faces of the French 
officers Sir George Hill discerned one face very familiar 
to him — the face of an old college friend ; the face of Eng- 
land's most dangerous enemy ; of the most prominent of the 
L^sh rebels— the face of Theobald Wolfe Tone. No one else 
had recognised Wolfe Tone. He was habited as a French 
officer, he spoke French easily, and everyone present assumed 
him to be a Frenchman— everyone with the exception of Sir 
George Hill. An honourable man would scarcely have cared 
to betray even his bitterest enemy under such circumstances ; 
but Sir George Hill chose to play the Judas part. He went 
up to Wolfe Tone and addressed him openly by his name. 
Tone was too proud to affect further concealment. * I am 
Theobald Wolfe Tone,' he answered to the greeting of his 
treacherous friend. He was immediately seized, and sent 
heavily ironed to Dublin. Li Dublin he was tried by court- 
martial, and sentenced to death. As an officer in the French 
Eepublic he claimed his right to a soldier's death ; he asked 
to be shot by a platoon of grenadiers. The members of the 
court-martial were inexorable. They had got their rebel, and 
they meant to show him no mercy. He was sentenced to be 
hanged. 

On the morning fixed for the execution Wolfe Tone was 
found in his cell with his throat cut. There is some mystery 
hanging over these later hours of Wolfe Tone's life. It is 
said, and generally believed, that he strove to commit suicide 
in order to escape the indignity of being hanged like a dog, 
and to preserve the uniform of which he was so proud from 
disgrace. On the other hand, there are not wanting voices to 
maintain that Wolfe Tone was murdered in prison by those 
who feared that even yet he might escape the vengeance of the 
law. Indeed there was a chance of escape. Curran, heroically 
fighting his desperate fight single-handed for the men of ninety- 
eight, moved in the King's Bench for a writ of habeas corpus, 



NIAETY-EIGHT 55 

on the ground that the civil law was still in force in Dublin, and 
that as Wolfe Tone held no commission in the English army, 
the court-martial had no jurisdiction. The point was an im- 
portant one, and Curran carried, and obtained his writ. It 
came too late to save Wolfe Tone's life, but it saved him from 
a shameful death. His wound had not proved mortal, and he 
would have been hanged but for the arrival of the writ. He 
died of his wound in prison. 

Some eighteen miles from Dublin, not far from the little 
village of Sallins, there is a little churchyard, the churchyard 
of Bodenstown. In that churchyard there is a little grave to 
which Irishmen make pilgrimages from all parts of the world. 
It is the grave of Theobald AVolfe Tone. Thomas Davis has 
devoted one of the noblest of his lyrics to the green grave in 
Bodenstown churchyard, with the winter wind raving about 
it, and the storm sweeping down on the plains of Kildare. 
Those see Wolfe Tone's grave best who see it under such 
aspects of earth, and air, and sky as Davis has immortalised 
in his poem. The desolate and deserted grass-grown grave- 
yard of the little lonely church, ruined and roofless, the 
crumbling walls thickly grown with ivy, the mouldering tombs, 
are seen in their most fitting aspect on a sombre day, and 
under weeping heavens. When Davis wrote the poem no 
stone marked the grave. Since then the patriotic spirit of 
neighbouring Clongowes has railed it in with iron rails, 
wrought at the top into the shape of shamrocks; and tie 
stone slab bears an inscription setting forth the name and 
the deeds of the man who lies beneath, and ending with 
' God save Ireland ! ' 

The rebellion of the United Irishmen had drawn into its 
eddies none of the leaders of the constitutional agitation. 
Neither Grattan nor Flood had ever belonged to the body, 
even in the days when it was an open organisation ; and 
neither of them had any sympathy with its efforts, or had 
believed in its possible success. While the desperate struggle 
to which it gave rise was raging, they stood aside, dropped 
for the moment from the page of history, and their places 



56 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

were taken by a man no less gifted, no less eloquent, no less 
patriotic than either of them — JohnPhilpot Curran. Curran, 
like Grattan and like Flood, had begmi his career by trying 
to play on the double pipes of poetry and oratory, and like 
Grattan and Flood he soon discovered the superiority of his 
prose to his verse, and abandoned rhymes for rhetoric. Unlike 
Grattan, however, and unlike Flood, Curran might perhaps 
have been a poet. He has at least left behind him some 
verse which deserves to be, and will be remembered, while 
nothing of Flood or Grattan can seriously be said to have 
remained in literature. Curran's poem of ' The Deserter ' is 
one of the most pathetic, and one of the most beautiful pieces 
of work in Irish literature. 

Curran rose from very humble origin, by the sheer strength 
of his genius, to a high position in Parliament and at the Bar ; 
and his patriotism was never sulhed by the shghtest pohtical 
subservience. He had been remarkable before the rebellion 
broke cut for his courageous defence of men unpopular with 
the Government. He had been threatened, like a new Cicero, 
with armed menaces, in his defence of Hamilton Eowan, but 
unlike Cicero he had faced the menaces undismayed. Afte]' 
the rebellion had broken out and been crushed, he made him- 
self the mouthpiece of freedom, and championed one after 
another the causes of all the leading political prisoners with 
an eloquence, a courage, and an ability which have earned 
him immortal honour. It is one of the proudest features in 
the struggle of ninety-eight that it produced men of the robe 
W-io were worthy of its men of the sword. 



CHAPTER V. 

THE UNION. 

* Hov^ did they pass the Union ? ' asked an indignant poet in 
the pages of the Nation more than thirty years ago ; and 
he answered his own question very eloquently : 



THE UNION 67 

By perjury and fraud ; 

By slaves who sold their land for gold. 
As Judas sold his God ; 

By all the savage acts that yet 
Have followed England's track — 

The pitchcap and the bayonet, 
The gibbet and the rack, 

And thus was passed the Union, 
By Pitt and Castlereagh ; 

Could Satan send for such an end 
More worthy tools than they ? 

The poet who penned that denunciation of the Union, of 
its agents and its accomphces, is now an eminent land com- 
missioner and a graceful and cultivated man of letters, whose 
translation of the ' Chanson de Roland ' has almost made that 
fine old epic a possession of the English language. Only the 
other day, in the House of Commons, England was reminded 
that Mr. O'Hagan, when this century was in its forties, 
uttered flaming treason under the signature of ' Sliabli Cuilinn,' 
and assured the supporters of foreign rule in Ireland that — 

We conquered once before, and now 
We'll conquer once again, 
And rend the cursed Union, 

And fling it to the wind — 
And Ireland's laws in Ireland's cause 

Alone our hearts shall bind ! 

The description of the Union, fiery, impetuous, and youthful 
though it be, is a sufficiently accurate presentment of the 
feeling which the Union inspired, and still inspires, in the 
minds of most Irishmen, which the Union now inspires in the 
minds of most Englishmen. 

Bloodshed and bribery were the means by which the Eng- 
lish Government accomplished the legislative ruin of Ireland. 
They had forced on a futile revolution in order that by crush- 
ing it out they might remove from their paths all the more 
dangerous obstacles to their scheme of destruction of Irish inde- 
pendence. The crimson year of ninety-eight had extinguished 
all possibility of active opposition to anything the Government 
might choose to attempt. The leaders of the national party 
were gone. Edward Fitzgerald was dead, the Sheares were 



58 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

dead, Wolfe Tone was dead, Bagenal Harvey was dead, Oliver 
Bond was dead. Some still lived, like Arthur O'Connor 
and Addis Emmet, but exiled for ever from Ireland. The 
spirit of the people, goaded for a moment into mad insurrec- 
tion, was crushed by merciless retaliation. Blood had done 
one-half of the Government's work ; it was now left for 
bribery to accomplish the other. All that was necessary was 
to obtain a Government majority in the Irish Parliament. 
That majority was to be obtained, like any other useful com- 
modity, by purchase. 

All the resources of the Treasury were employed to corrupt 
the corruptible. The flood-gates of the Exchequer were 
opened, and a very Pactolus drowned with its golden current 
the few dying sparks of patriotism and honour which may have 
lingered somewhere in the hearts of the majority of Ireland's 
representatives. The Parliament was a Danae and Corn- 
wallis a new Jupiter, dissolving himself into gold in order to 
work her ruin. 

It must be recognised that Cornwallis, who, with all his 
faults, was a soldier and a gentleman, took no great delight 
in his part of Jove the Corrupter. Destiny was a little hard 
upon Cornwallis. Not many years before he had been com- 
pelled to strike his flag and surrender his bright sword to those 
hated American revolutionaries, who were driving out their 
masters in the name of the Continental Congress and the great 
Jehovah. Surrender was bad enough ; but surely the part 
that Cornwallis was now called upon to play was infinitely 
worse. Better to surrender as a soldier than to succeed as 
the profligate buyer of a iiation's liberty, ' I am kept here,' 
he complains in 1799, ' to manage matters of most disgusting- 
nature to my feelings.' . . . 'My occupation is now of the most 
unpleasant nature, negotiating and jobbing with the most 
corrupt people under heaven. I despise and hate myself every 
hour,' he declares, 'for engaging in such dirty work.' And 
again the soldier spirit gets the better of him, and he cries 
out :, ' I trust I shall live to get out of this most accursed of 



THE UNION 59 

all situations, and most repugnant to my feelings. How I 
long to kick those whom my public duties oblige me to 
court.' 

Cornwallis could not, however, afford to gratify his desire 
to kick the supple and servile majority whom he was employed 
to manipulate. With Lord Clare at his right hand and 
Castlereagh at his left, he went his way against the Irish 
Parliameiit, and won her as the Sabines won Tarpeia — with 
gold. It is said that when Castlereagh offered direct bribes 
to Shapland Carew, member for Wexford county, Carew 
threatened to expose Castlereagh's corruption in the House 
of Commons. Castlereagh answered the threat as Wilkes 
answered a similar threat of Luttrell's, by declaring that 
he should in that case promptly deny the charge. The 
story is characteristic of the man ; Carew did not make his 
accusation. 

When the Irish Parliament met in the January of 1799, 
the first hint at the desirability of Union was to be found in 
the speech from the throne. It was immediately and earnestly 
opposed by a man whose name was destined to become famous 
well-nigh a century later in the same struggle against the 
Union, Sir John Parnell. He held high office in the Irish 
Government when the attempt to effect the Union was first 
tentatively made. Sir John Parnell was resolute in his oppo- 
sition. His determination immediately cost him his office. 
The Government was determined to strike, whenever they 
safely could, at all who resisted their overtures ; and as 
Parnell was not to be influenced by the highest allurements 
that Cornwallis could hold out, he was promptly removed from 
his position as Chancellor of the Exchequer. 

But, though the Government could deprive Parnell of his 
place, they could not silence him. The debate which he had 
inaugurated was carried on for two-and-twenty hours, and 
ended at last by giving the Government a majority of one. 
Such a majority was in reality a victory for Parnell and the 
Opposition ; and on report, a fresh motion against the para- 



60 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

graph approving of Union was carried against ttie Government 
by a majority of five. For the moment it seemed as if the 
scheme of Union was defeated. But, though the Government 
was alarmed and annoyed by its failure, it was not seriously 
dismayed. It had evidently not been generous enough in its 
offers. It had not scattered its largesse with sufficiently com- 
prehensive discretion and liberality. Heavy pressure was put 
upon all the placemen who seemed inclined to prove recalci- 
trant. Obedience to the Government, or immediate dismissal 
were the alternatives laid before them. For those who were 
not already in the Government pay, and in the Government 
power, no price was deemed too heavy. Place and office were 
lavishly distributed. Peerages secured the hii^hcst, and secret- 
service money won the lowest of those who were to be bought. 
Vast sums changed hands in the enormous bribery which, in 
the end, conquered the Parliament. The whole sum amounted 
to much more than a million ; and in many cases the fortu- 
nate masters of many seats in the House of Commons received 
no less than 50,000/. as their share of the booty. 

I have seen a very interesting letter from James Fitzgerald, 
dated Dublin, January 5, 1799, and addressed to ' Edward 
Malone, Esq., Queen Anne Street East, London.' It is en- 
dorsed by its recipient with a certain dry humour with these 
words : ' Overcharged, as almost every letter coming through 
the Irish Post Office is. E. M.' This ktter was given to Mr. 
Parnell by a distinguished Irishman, an author and colonial 
official, on account of an allusion it contains to his ancestor 
Sir John Parnell' s place being given to James Corry. It is 
sealed in red wax with an altar and a fiery heart. It begins: 
* My dear Malone, — I am sure no circumstances within 
human foresight can prevent the alarming proposition of an 
Union. It is, I believe, determined to recur to every instru- 
ment short of the bayonet to carry it.' This sentence might 
be taken as the text for the history of the Union. The 
Government were prepared to use every instrument to carry 
their point. They might very well except the bayonet. It 
had been used to such bloody purpose already that there was 



THE XINION 61 

little apparent chance of their being immediately called upon 
to resume it. 

In the January of 1800 an Irish Parliament met for the 
last time for nearly a century. Its assembling found the 
Government party confident of victory, the Opposition despe- 
rate and despairing. It would seem that for a moment the Oppo- 
sition dreamed of making that appeal to arms which they had 
regarded with such horror when it was made by the United 
Irishmen. But they made no such attempt. The Govern- 
ment was far too well prepared, and any effort of the kind 
would have been hopeless. Nothing was to be done but to 
discuss the merits of the Bill which was to deprive Ireland of 
her representative assembly, and to hope against hope that 
they might be able to defeat it. The tactics of the Govern- 
ment were ingenious. The address from the Crown contained 
no allusion to the threatened and dreaded Union. The very 
omission alarmed the Opposition, and a debate immediately 
sprang up upon a motion directly asserting the independence 
which had been obtained for the Parliament by the Volunteers 
in 1782. 

It was curiously appropriate that in the very middle of 
this debate the man who had done more than any other to 
obtain the independence of the Irish Parliament should make 
his appearance, coming from his. sick bed to f.ght once more 
for the liberties which were themselves in the throes of death. 
Grattan had faded for some time out of public view. He had 
no sympathy for the movement which Wolfe Tone had begun, 
and which ended with Wolfe Tone's death in a Dublin prison. 
But when the independence of that Parliament of which he 
was the parent was threatened, he came out of his self-chosen 
obscurity to fight one last fight in its favour. He came too 
late. The silver voice which had so proudly hailed the re- 
generated assembly, and wished it a perpetual existence, had 
no power to touch the hardened hearts or charm the deafened 
ears of the purchased Senate of Cornwallis and Castlereagh. 
Grattan himself was in some degree the cause of the disaster 
which was now about to fall upon his country. Animated by 



62 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

a too generous belief in the fidelity of his opponents' pledges, 
he had counselled the disarmament of the Volunteers, and his 
counsels had conquered the more prudent advice and the more 
far-seeing statesmanship of Flood. It was too late now to 
redress the mischief caused by this misplaced confidence. 

Hussey Burgh's fine simile, taken from the legend of 
Jason, in which he compared the laws of England to the 
dragon's teeth which brought forth armed men, had, unfortu- 
nately, been completed into a more perfect parallel with the 
antique story. The armed men who sprang from the crop 
sown by Jason were compelled by subtle enchantments to turn 
their arms against themselves, and to destroy each other. 
The enchantments of Grattan's persuasive eloquence had 
destroyed the armed strength of Ireland, and had dissipated 
the legions which might have preserved her independence, 
and left her helpless and defenceless to the menaces of a 
triumphant Government. 

Secure although the Government believed themselves to 
be, and confident as they were of victory, Grattan's appear- 
ance was none the less disquieting, and even alarming. The 
Castle turned Corry, one of the ablest of their tools, and one 
of the bitterest enemies of Grattan, against the returned Tri- 
bune. Corry had once played the part of a patriot, and had 
afterwards transferred himself and his services to the Govern- 
ment, for which he had been but lately rewarded by the 
Chancellorship of the Exchequer, from which Parnell had been 
driven. Corry might have believed that advancing years and 
ill-health had weakened the powers of Grattan's mind. He 
might for the moment have fondly imagined that he was a 
match for the great orator, and that the fierceness and the 
brutality of his attack would discredit and possibly discomfit 
his adversary. Corry was grievously mistaken. Grattan had 
once before assailed Flood in terms of almost unsurpassable 
bitterness. That speech against Flood might have been re- 
garded as almost the high- water mark of triumphant Parlia- 
mentary vituperation ; but if no one save Grattan could have 
surpassed that effort, it was in Grattan's own power to sur- 



THE TTNION 63 

pass Grattan. The savage vehemence of the assault upon 
Flood pales almost into compUrnent and courtesy when con- 
trasted with the merciless invective which he now launched 
against Corry. Even through the thick skin and deadened 
conscience of the Castle placeman the insults of Grattan's 
speech burned and eat like a corrosive acid. The speech is 
short, but it is a masterpiece of its kind. Every blow stings 
like the blow of a whip ; every sentence draws blood. 

' The limited talents of some men,' said Grattan, in 
fierce scorn of his antagonist's clumsy attack, * render it im- 
possible for them to be severe without being unparliamentary.' 
But Grattan promised Corry, and he kept his word, that 
he would show him how to be severe and parliamentary at 
the same time. The charge of treason which Corry had 
levelled against Grattan he treated with defiant scorn. It 
would have been in no sense dishonourable but only honour- 
able for Grattan to have been guilty of treason in the sense 
that Wolfe Tone, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, and Arthur O'Con- 
nor were guilty of treason. The sting of the accusation lay 
in the suggestion that Grattan was a traitor who had saved 
himself discreetly from the consequences of his treachery. It 
was perfectly well known that Grattan never had any sympathy 
whatever with the movement of the United Irishmen, and it 
was perfectly easy for him to disprove the clumsy falsehoods 
of Corry. ' I despise the falsehood,' said Grattan. ' If such 
a charge were made by an honest man I should answer it in 
the manner I shall do before I sit down ; but I shall first 
reply to it when not made by an honest man.' Then came a 
succession of sentences glowing like living lava. The fool 
had awakened the sleeping volcano, and it answered him with 
annihilation. 

The speech is familiar to every student of Irish history, 
and yet there are sentences of it which bear incessant quota- 
tion. When he declared that he scorns ' to answer any wizard 
of the Castle, throwing himself into fantastical airs ; ' when 
he described him as ' deserting the occupation of a barrister 
for that of a parasite and pander ; ' when he said, ' I will not 



64 IB FLAN D SINCE THE UNION 

call him villain, because it would be unparliamentary, and 
he is a Privy Councillor ; I will not call him fool, because he 
happens to be the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; ' when he 
asserted ' that the treason of the IMinister against the liberties 
of the people was intinitely worse than the rebellion of the 
people against the Minister,' he conferred on Corry a kind 
of infamous immortality. 

The Castle parasite sent a challenge to Grattan. The op- 
ponents met next morning in the Phctuiix Park. Grattan was 
as ready with his pistol as with his tongue, and he wounded 
Corry in the arm. The physical injury to Corry was slight ; 
morally he was pulverised. Grattan had not taken his life, 
but he had ruined his reputation. No further attempt was 
made by any of the creatures of the Government to draw 
upon themselves the destruction of Grattan's eloquence. 

But the eloquence of Grattan could not save the constitu- 
tion or the country. The resolutions in favour of the Union 
of the two kingdoms were carried by successive majorities, 
and on May 21, Lord Castlereagh's Bill, based on the resolu- 
tions, was carried on its first reading by the majority which 
the Government had calculated upon — a majority of sixty. 
On May 26, the second reading of the Bill was carried, after 
the House had listened to the last of Grattan's anti-Union 
speeches. There need be no apology for quoting here again 
the immortal peroration of that final speech. Like the 
passage from Shakespeare which it enshrines, as a relic is 
enshrined in a frame scarcely less precious than the sacred 
inclosure, it is eternally fresh and eternally beautiful. 

' Yet I do not give up the country : I see her in a swoon, 
but she is not dead ; though in her tomb she lies helpless 
and motionless, still there is on her lips a spirit of life, and 
on her cheek a glow of beauty — 

Thou art not conquered, beauty's ensign yet 
Is crimson in thy hps, and in thy cheeks, 
And death's pale flag is not advanced there. 

While a plank of the vessel sticks together, I will not leave 
her. Let the courtier present his flimsy sail, and carry the 



THE UNION 65 

light bark of his faith with every new breath of wind ; I will 
remain anchored here with fidelity to my country, faitliful to 
lier freedom, faithful to her fall.' 

It was fitting that Grattan should pronounce the funeral 
elegy for the liberties whose birth he had hailed. That 
liberty which he had hoped might be perpetual endured 
exactly eighteen years. Grattan had traced the career in 
Ireland from injuries to arms, and fiom arms to liberty. He 
had now in his old age to witness the reverse process — to 
watch the progress from liberty to arms, and from arms 
to injuries. Sir Jonah Barrington has described with an 
eloquence beyond his wont, and worthy of the solemn 
occasion, the scene inside the House of Commons when the 
fatal moment came which deprived Ireland for nearly a 
century of her constitutional liberty. The scene outside the 
House when all was over was even more impressive. The 
Speaker of the House, followed by a small body of the faithful 
and honourable Opposition, passed out into the crowded 
streets. The people uncovered as people uncover in the 
presence of the dead, and followed in august silence the 
Speaker and his companions to the Speaker's house in Moles- 
worth Street. There the Speaker faced for a moment the 
still silent people, the death of whose liberty he had so 
unwillingly witnessed, and passed without a word into his 
dwelling. 

So ended the Parliament of the Volunteers. As a legis- 
lative body it was not an ideal assembly. It had many faults, 
many weaknesses, and it perished in the end through its ov/n 
unworthiness. But it still was, however insufficiently, the 
representative body of the nation. In time it would have 
grown more liberal ; in time Catholics would have been 
admitted to its deliberations ; in time it would have proved 
the true head of a free state. Such as it was, with all its 
imperfections, it preserved for Ireland that proud privilege of 
legislative independence which now, for eighty-six years, she 
has mourned without cessation. The Parliament which is 
destined speedily to take the place of the lost Parliament will 

F 



66 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

be a very different body from that which Grattan welcomed 
into existence, and lamented over in its fall. It will be a 
body worthy of the Irish nation, which, in the long lapse of 
years since the beginning of this century, has been steadily 
forming itself and training itself for the restoration of its 
liberties. It will be a free Parliament in the sense that 
Grattan's never was ; for in it for the first time the represen- 
tatives of the national faith will find their rightful place. It 
is to be hoped, it is to be beheved, that the orator who hails 
the inauguration of this Parliament may say, addressing it 
with a greater confidence even than that of Grattan —Esto 
perpetica. 

But though die Union was accomplished it was not 
acquiesced in by the Irish people without one final struggle. 
At the time wlien the plans of the United Irishmen were 
slowly ripening towards revolution, and when Wolfe Tone and 
Edward Fitzgerald still believed in the immediate regeneration 
of their country, there were two young men in Dublin 
University — close personal friends — who were watching with 
peculiar interest the progress of events. Both were excep- 
tionally gifted young men, and both were destined to leave 
behind them names that will live for ever in the history of 
the Irish nation. One was Thomas Moore ; the other, his 
junior by a year and his senior by one class in the University, 
was Eobert Emmet. It is especially natural that two such 
young men should take the keenest interest in the national 
movement that was going on about them. It was a move- 
ment calculated to attract all the generous and impassioned 
impulses of youth. Both Moore and Emmet were profoundly 
ambitious for their nation's welfare ; both of them, we may 
well assume, felt conscious of the possession of abilities 
beyond the average ; and both were animated by a desire to 
be of active service to their people. The desire, however, 
which merely led Moore to become the poetical voice of Ireland's 
aspirations and regrets, urged Emmet into directer and more 
decided action. Robert Emmet was a brother of Thomas 
Addis Emmet. He was, therefore, closely in connection with 



THE UNION 67 

the revolutionary movement, and did all that lay in his power 
to advance it by his speeches in the Debating Society and in 
the Historical Society of the College. Political speeches were, 
of course, forbidden in such bodies as these two societies ; but 
Emmet always contrived to introduce into his utterances upon 
any of the themes set down for debate some burning words, 
which those who listened to him, and loved him, could readily 
interpret into justification of the United Irishmen, and eil- 
couragement of their efforts. 

Between the young orator and the young poet the closest 
friendship and affection existed. The genius of Moore was 
naturally captivated by the pure and lofty enthusiasm of 
Eobert Emmet, and it is almost surprising that under the 
circumstances Moore did not become more deeply involved in 
the conspiracy that spread all round him. Moore had not, 
however, the nature of the conspirator, or of the very active 
politician. He was called upon to do other work in this 
world, and he did that work so worthily that he may well 
be forgiven for having been so little of a rebel at a time when 
rebellion seemed the duty of every Irishman. Moore tells a 
touching little story of himself and of his friend, which in 
itself illustrates the different natures of the two young men. 
Moore had become possessed of that precious volume in which 
the labours of Mr. Bunting had collected so much of the 
national music of Ireland ; and he delighted in passing long 
hours in playing over to himself the airs which he was de- 
stined later on to make so famous by his verses. Emmet 
often sat by him while he played, and Moore records how, one 
evening, just as he had finished playing the spirited tune 
called ' The Eed Fox,' Emmet sprang up as from a reverie, 
and exclaimed, ' Oh, that I were at the head of twenty thou- 
sand men marching to that air ! ' The air which awakened 
in Emmet the gallant hope, which he was never destined to 
see realised, had probably started in the brain of Moore dim 
memories of the lost glories of Ireland ; of the Knights of the 
Red Branch of Malachi with the gold torque, and of the 
buried city of Lough Neagh. The music which Emmet had 

f2 



68 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

desired to hear as the marching song of victory is familiar to 
every Irishman as, 'Let Erin remember the days of old.' 
* How little did I think,' said the poet, ' that in one of the 
most touching of the sweet airs I used to play to him, his own 
dying words would find an interpreter so worthy of their sad 
but proud feeling ; or that another of those mournful strains 
would long be associated in the hearts of his countrymen with 
the memory of her who shared with Ireland his last blessing 
and prayer.' 

Ninety-eight had come and gone like a dream. The 
leaders of the United Irishmen were dead, in exile, or hiding 
from the law. The Irish Parhament had passed from exist- 
ence, and the hated Union had become an accomplished fact. 
The promises of the British Minister, which had done so 
much to facihtate the passing of the Act of Union, had boen 
shamefully violated. One of the most important factors in 
securing the Union was the pledge entered into by Pitt, and 
promulgated all over Ireland in the form of a printed speech, 
that legislation upon Catholic Emancipation and the Tithe 
question would immediately follow the legal union of the two 
countries. It cannot be denied that such a promise, made 
in so solemn a manner, and by so responsible a Minister, 
must have had the greatest effect in winning support to 
the Union ; and in many cases where it did not win actual 
support, at least it must have prevented energetic opposition. 

To the vast bulk of the Irish people the question of Catholic 
Emancipation was so immediately important, on so large a 
number the grievous burden of the Tithe question pressed 
heavily, that it can scarcely be a matter of surprise if many 
men were ready, or, at least, not unwilling, to welcome any 
measure which offered to grant the one and relieve the other. 
But Pitt had pledged himself to more than he could perform. 
The bigoted and incapable monarch, whose peculiar privilege 
it was to cause more injuries to his own country — that is, to 
his own kingdom— than any other English monarch, and who 
had always consistently and steadily hated the Irish people 
because of their religious behef, obstinately refused to give 



THE UNION 69 

his consent to any measure for the relief of Catholics. Pitt 
immediately resigned his office, just eleven days after the 
Union had become law. The stubborn folly of the Third 
George does not excuse the Minister who had done his best 
to delude Ireland by raising hopes which he was not certain 
of gratifying, and making pledges which he was unable to 
fulfil. 

The Union brought with it nothing whatever that bettered 
the condition of Ireland. The system of political corruption, 
which had engendered the Union, continued in full force after 
the Union had come into existence. Every place of profit, 
every post of importance, was held by Englishmen. Lord 
Clare, the hated Fitzgibbon, had died, indeed, soon after the 
Union— died it was said of disappointment at discovering that 
his own power acid influence had vanished with the political 
change of which he had been one of the most active causes. 
Castlereagh had gone back to England, to end some years 
later his dishonourable life by a desperate death. But the 
removal of one enemy only left room for the admission of 
another. Tlie places of Castlereagh and Fitzgibbon were 
filled by politicians no less devoted to Ascendency, no less 
inimical to anything approaching to patriotism or to nation- 
alism. 

Although the prospect of Catholic Emancipation seemed 
as far off as ever, there was, however, a change in the attitude 
of the Castle circle towards the Irish Catholics, at least to- 
wards the rich and influential among them. A policy of con- 
ciliation was the order of the day, and conciliation meant 
treating the more eminent among the Catholics with some- 
thing approaching to the ordinary courtesy of civilised exist- 
ence. The vast bulk of the Catholic population was, however, 
as badly oft' as ever. Ireland was labouring under heavy 
coercive legislation, and the policy of coercion which began 
with the Union Ijas existed almost without intermission ever 
since. It could be said almost without exaggeration in 1885 
that Ireland had not been governed by ordinary law for a single 
year of all the eighty-five years that had elapsed since the 



70 IBELA^L SINCE THE UNION 

two islands were linked together in unholy and unreal union. 
Coercion, as it always did, begot disturbance and outrage. 
There were desperate riots in Limerick, Waterford, and Tip- 
perary in the year of the Union — smouldering embers of the 
revolution of ninety-eight, which were destined still to .break 
out into one final, fitful conflagration. 

Eobert Emmot saw the sufferings of his country with in- 
dignation, but not with despair. He conceived the possibility 
of reviving the spirit of ninety-eight. In his eyes revolution 
was not dead, but only asleep ; and he proudly fancied that 
his might be the voice to wake rebellion from its trance, and 
lead it to its triumph. He had some personal fortune of his 
own, which he unselfishly devoted to the purpose he had in 
view. Gradually he began to gather around him a cluster of 
the disaffected — survivors of ninety-eight who had escaped the 
grave, the gibbet, or exile — men like the heroic Myles Byrne, 
of Wexford, who had evaded the clutch of tlie law, and was 
lying hidden in Dublin, as assistant in a timber-yard, and 
waiting upon fortune. In Myles Byrne Emmet found a ready 
and a daring colleague, and each found others no less ready, 
no less daring, and no less devoted to their country, to aid in 
the new revolutionary movement. Like the United Irishmen, 
Emmet was willing to avail himself of French arms ; but he 
trusted France less than the United Irishmen had done. He 
had been in Paris ; he had had interviews with Napoleon ; he 
had distrusted the First Consul, and, as we know from his dying 
speech, he never for a moment entertained the slightest idea 
of exchanging the dominion of England for the dominion of 
France. His scheme was desperate, but it was by no means 
hopeless. Large sto] es of arms and gunpowder were accumu- 
lated in the various depots in Dublin. Thousands of men 
were pledged to the cause, and were prepared to risk their lives 
for it. The means of estabhshing a provisional Government 
had been carefully thought out, and had been given effect to 
in an elaborate document, of which a vast quantity was printed, 
ready to be sown broadcast through the city and the country 
as soon as the green flag floated over Dublin Castle. 



THE UNION 71 

That was Emmet's chief purpose. Once master of the 
Castle, and Dubhn would be practically in his power ; and 
Dubhn once in the hands of revolution, why, then rebellion 
would spread through the country like fire in a jungle, and 
Ireland might indeed be free. The plot was daring ; but the 
brain that conceived it was keen and bold ; the hands and 
hearts that were pledged to it were true and gallant. Every- 
thing seemed to promise, if not a successful revolution, at 
least a rising which should come so near success as to shake the 
power of the Government, and practically compel great con- 
cessions, if not the Repeal of the Union. It all ended in a 
street scuffle, and a small and abortive provincial rising. 
Treachery, which has always been at the right hand of 
Authority in Ireland, was, as usual, at work : and although 
the Executive appear to have made light at first of the infor- 
mation that was daily conveyed to them of Emmet's purposes, 
it is certain that the carefully-matured plot failed disastrously 
at the moment of execution. 

It is scarcely necessary to recapitulate the events of that 
memorable evening of July 23, 1808. At ten o'clock a rocket 
sent up from Thomas Street blazed for a moment, the meteor 
of insurrection, in the unwonted darkness of that summer 
night. But the signal that was to have been the herald of 
freedom was only the herald of failure. A small mob of men 
hastened to the depot in Marshalsea Lane, which was the prin- 
cipal store of arms. There pikes were hurriedly ha jded out 
to the crowd, and there Emmet, who had hoped to head an 
army, found himself the centre of an undisciplined rabble. 
His hopes must have sunk low as he stood there in the dim 
and dismal street, in his glittering uniform of green and gold ; 
but his heart did not fail him for a moment. He turned to- 
wards the Castle at the head of his turbulent horde as com- 
posedly as if he had been marshalling the largest army in 
Europe. But the crowd lacked cohesion, lacked purpose, 
lacked determination. It fell away from its leader loosely* 
even aimlessly. Some rushed wildly towards the Castle ; 
others, at the moment when unity and concentration were of 



72 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the utmost importance, hurried off in another direction to sack 
a debtor's prison and set the inmates free. 

While the disorganised crowd was still in Thomas Street, 
while Emmet was vainly trying to rally his forces and accom- 
plish something, a carriage came slowly down the street — the 
carriage of Lord Kilwarden, Lord Chief Justice of the King's 
Bench. Liside the carriage were Lord Kilwarden, his daughter, 
and his nephew, the Rev. Mr. Wolfe. The mob surrounded 
the carriage ; Lord Kilwarden and his nephew were drag- 
ged from the carriage, and killed with innumerable thrusts. 
The girl was left untouched, was, it is said, carried out of 
danger by Robert Emmet himself, who had vainly attempted 
to stop the purposeless slaughter. Before the Chief Justice 
was quite dead Major Sirr and a large body of his soldiers 
made their appearance, and the mob vanished almost without 
resistance, leaving several prisoners in the hands of the mili- 
tary. The stores of arms were seized, the prisoners safely 
put under lock and key, and in a few hours Dublin was as 
quiet as if no effort at insurrection had ever disturbed the 
tranquillity of its streets. Emmet had disappeared, no one 
knew where. Upon the following day a small insurrection 
took place in Ulster under Thomas Russell, which came to 
nothing. Russell made his escape, but was captured a few 
months later, tried, and hanged. Two of his co-revolutionists, 
Andrew Hunter and David Porter, shared his fate. 

Emmet had disappeared, no one knew where — no one, 
that is, except some dozen of his followers and some farmers 
in the Wicklow mountains, whose hospitality and protection 
were extended to the fugitive patriot. Emmet might easily 
have escaped to France if he had chosen, but he delayed till 
too late. Emmet was a young man, and Emmet was in love. 
* The idol of his heart,' as he calls her in his dying speech, 
was Sarah Curran, the daughter of John Philpot Curran, the 
great orator who had pLiyed so important a part in defending 
the State prisoners of ninety-eight. Emmet was determined 
to see her before he went. He placed his life upon the cast, 
and lost it. He returned to Dublin, and was hiding at 



THE UJSION 73 

Harold's Cross when his place of refuge was betrayed, and 
he was arrested by Major Sirr, the same who had brought 
^it'?v^rald to his death, and who now, strangely enough, 
occupies a corner of the same graveyard with the * gallant 
and seditious Geraldine.' 

Curran very bitterly opposed Emmet's love for Sarah, and 
the voice which had been raised so often and so eloquently in 
defence of the other heroes and martyrs of Irish revolution 
was not lifted up in defence of Emmet. Cunan has been 
often and severely censured for not undertaking Emmet's de- 
fence, and he has been accused, in consequence, of being at 
least indirectly the cause of his death. But we may safely 
assume that no advocacy either of men or of angels could by 
any possibility have stirred the hearts of those in authority, 
and saved the life of the man who was presumptuous enough 
to rebel against the Union. The trial was hurried through. 
Every Irish schoolboy knows the impassioned and eloquent 
address which Emmet delivered — an address which even the 
tragic circumstances could not save from the brutal interrup- 
tions of Judge Norbury. On the altar of truth and liberty, 
Emmet had extinguished the torch of friendship, had offered 
up the idol of his soul and the object of his affections. With 
the shadow of death upon him, the doomed patriot addressed 
his country in words of well-nigh prophetic import, forbidding 
them to write his epitaph until his country had taken her 
place among the nations of the earth. The words did not 
pass his lips long before his death. He was found guilty late 
in the night of September 19, and he was hanged the next 
morning in Thomas Street, on the spot where the gloomy 
church of St, Catherine looks down Bridgefoot Street, where 
his principal stores of arms had been found. 

Just before his death he wrote a letter to Eichard, Curran's 
son, full of melancholy tenderness, regret for his lost love, 
and resignation for his untimely death. 

* If there was anyone in the world in whose breast my 
death might be supposed not to stifle every spark of resent- 
ment, it might be you. I have deeply injured you — I have 



74 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

deeply injured the happiness of a sister that you love, and 
who was formed to give happiness to everyone about her, 
instead of having her own mind a prey to affliction. Oh, 
Eichard ! I have no excuse to offer, but that I meant the re- 
verse ; I intended as much happiness for Sarah as the most 
ardent love could have given her. I never did tell you how I 
idolised her ; it was not with a wild or unfounded passion, 
but it was an attachment increasing every hour, from an ad- 
miration of the purity of her mind and respect for her talents. 
I did dwell in secret upon the prospect of our union. I did 
hope that success, while it afforded the opportunity of our 
union, might be the means of confirming an attachment which 
misfortune had called forth. I did not look to honours for 
myself — praise I would have asked from the lips of no man ; 
but I could have wished to read in the glow of Sarah's coun- 
tenance that her husband was respected. My love, Sarah ! 
It was not thus that I thought to have requited your affection. 
I had hoped to be a prop round which your affections might 
have clung, and which would never have been shaken : but 
a rude blast has snapped it, and they have fallen over a 
grave ! ' 

Such was the fate of Robert Emmet. His dying request 
has been faithfully obeyed by his countrymen ; no tombstone 
bears his name, no statue typifies his memory. His old 
friend, the companion of his youth, the poet who had loved 
him, has honoured his memory with two of his noblest lyrics, 
and has devoted a third to the girl whom- Emmet's love has 
made immortal. Curran never forgave his daughter for 
having given her affections to Emmet ; he practically dis- 
owned her, and did not, it is said, even extend his forgive- 
ness to her at the hour of her death some years later. It 
is melancholy to have to record the fact that the betrothed 
wife of Robert Emmet was not entirely faithful to his memory. 
She married, at the instance, it is said, of her friends, and did 
not long survive her marriage. 



76 

CHAPTER VI. 

CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION. 

The White Terror which followed upon the failure of Emmet's 
rising was accompanied by almost all the horrors which 
marked the hours of repression after the rebellion of ninety- 
eight. As soon as the news of Emmet's daring attempt reached 
London, a royal message was sent to Parliament, imploring 
fresh powers to deal with the mutinous island. The two 
Houses displayed all the alacrity usual with them when 
their business is coercion for Ireland. There was not then, 
nor for more than two ge aerations later, an Irish party in the 
English House of Commons, to warn an indifferent majority 
that coercion could only be won with bitter travail and by yet 
further violation of constitutional rights. The measures 
which the king demanded were rattled through the two 
Houses at breakneck speed. A Habeas Corpus Act Suspen- 
sion Bill and a Bill enforcing military law in Ireland were 
passed through all their stages in the Lower House before ten 
o'clock of the evening on which they were introduced. By 
eleven o'clock the same night they had received the assent of 
the Lords and become part of the law of the land. Then the 
old brutal business began again ; the old devil's dance of spies 
and informers went merrily forward; the prisons were choked 
with prisoners. The spies and informers received liberal re- 
wards for each arrest, and took good care to keep the prison 
market well stocked with victims. 

It is simply horrible to read of the treatment endured by 
these unhappy prisoners The Russian Nihilist, Stepniak, has 
lately given, in his grim record of ' Russia under the Tzars,' 
ghastly accounts of the way in which political prisoners were 
treated in the dominions of the Tzar. All that Russian political 
prisoners are said to have suffered, Irish political prisoners 
suffered under the gentle rule of the Third George in the 
early part of the present century. Men who were arresled 



76 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

immediately after Emmet's rising were in many cases kept in 
prison for no less than three years, and subjected to inhuman 
indignities without any kind of trial or any kind of investiga- 
tion into their guilt or innocence. * If anything,' says an 
English writer who cannot be accused of undue sympathy with 
Irish aspirations, ' if anything could extend a show of reason, 
or the colour of an excuse, to the insurrectionary movements 
of Emmet and Eussell, it was the subsequent barbarity of the 
Government to every person accused or suspected of sympathy 
with their designs or the will to aid them.' 

The Government acted in blind panic. The fear of a 
French invasion was eternally before their eyes, and they 
could conceive of no better means of linking the sympathies 
of the Irish people to the English Crown than the jail and 
the gallows. They guarded themselves against further insur- 
rections with ferocious ingenuity, but they took not a single 
step towards allaying the discontent which animated and kept 
alive the spirit of revolution. The juggle of the Union had 
been successfully accomplished by deluding the Catholics with 
pledges of emancipation, but the moment that the Union was 
passed the covenant with the Catholics was broken. Pitt re- 
tired from office eleven days after the passing of the Act of 
Union, because the king would make no concessions to the 
Catholic claims ; he returned to office in 1804 on the distinct 
understanding that he was no longer to weary his intolerant 
monarch with suggestions of relief for the Irish Catholics. 
The Minister accepted the terms and kept the engagement. 
The royal ears were unvexed by any importunities from his 
obedient Cabinet about the wrongs of Irish Catholics. 

The supporters of Pitt's policy urge that there is the 
clearest proof of his anxiety to legislate upon three great ques- 
tions — Catholic Emancipation, the Tithes of the Established 
Church, and the support of the Roman Catholic clergy. They 
rest mainly upon Pitt's speech, which was showered like 
autumn leaves all over Ireland — which by its promises, in- 
deed by its pledges, did so much to facilitate the Union. A 
former secretary to the Chancellor of the Irish Exchequer has 



CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 77 

declared that Pitt had actually prepared a Bill for the commu- 
tation of tithes. This may be ; the certainty is that nothing 
was done. The stolid and bigoted king was obstinate in his 
refusal to sanction any measures of Catliolic toleration, and 
Pitt, exculpating himself by ingenious distinctions between 
expediency and right, gave way, after a comparatively brief 
interval of absence from office. 

Outraged by the law, detested by the Sovereign, abandoned 
by the Minister, the position of Irish Catholicity was bad 
enough, but it had not merely to contend with the harshness 
of the law, the hatred of the king, and the treason of the 
statesman. A fresh enemy swelled the ranks against it — an 
enemy growing more powerful and more hostile with the 
failure of every fresh effort for Catholic relief— the enemy that 
was known by the name of the Orange Society. ' The Orange 
Society,' says an English author, ' grew out of the violent 
spirit into which the selfishness of Protestant monopoly now 
precipitated its animosity. Lured by the lust of power and 
the avarice of self-interest, the Protestants began to band 
-themselves together by secret oaths ; and in many places 
committed themselves with the blind fury of zealots to the 
trammels of their leaders.' The Orange Society first came 
into existence immediately after what is known as the ' Battle 
of the Diamond.' 

On September 21, 1795, a violent conflict took place 
between the Protestant ' Peep-o'-day Boys ' and the Catholic 
' Defenders ' at the Diamond, a place where four roads meet 
in Loughall, not far from Armagh. After a desperate struggle 
the * Defenders ' were defeated, and many of their number 
killed. In commemoration of this event the first Orange 
lodge was formed in Armagh on the same date, on September 
21, 1795, at Timaekell ; and soon after another lodge was 
established in Dublin. 

It has been said, ho"wever, that the first Orange lodge was 
founded in the camp of William of Orange at Exeter, early in 
November 1688. There is no evidence to support this claim, 
which is not alluded to by Sir Kichard Musgrave. Musgrave, 



78 TBELAND SIJVCM THE VNION^ 

the dedication of whose work on the Eebellion of 1798 was 
coldly and decisively declined by the nobleman to whom it was 
proffered, says : ' In commemoration of that victory ' (the 
battle of the Diamond) * the first Orange lodge was formed in 
the county of Armagh, though the name of Orangemen existed 
some time before.' Furthermore, in 1835 Lieutenant-Colonel 
Vernon, M.P., said before a Select Committee of the House of 
Commons, that there was no Orange institution in any other 
form in existence before 1795. In the January of 1798 a 
solemn manifesto was issued by the members of the Dublin 
lodge, declaring that the principles of their existence were 
the maintenance of Church and State — that is to say, the 
maintenance of the Protestant faith, and the imposition of 
the Protestant faith upon Catholic Ireland. For some time 
the society made but little progress, and it was not until 
after the passing of the Act of Union that it began to make 
sensible advances in number and in influence. According 
to Francis Plowden its purpose was to uphold the Crown so 
long as the Crown upheld Protestant ascendency — and no 
longer. He even goes further and declares : * It has been 
asserted by well-informed though anonymous authors that the 
original obligation or oath of Orangemen was to the follow- 
ing effect : I, A. B., do swear that I will be true to king and 
Government, and that I will exterminate the Catholics of 
Ireland so far as in my power lies.' This oath, it must be 
admitted, has been denied by the Orange lodges, but it is not 
apparently denied that their oath of allegiance was only con- 
ditional on the Crown supporting Protestant ascendency. 

The Orange Society gained from its very earliest days 
much support and encouragement from the ostentatious pat- 
ronage of the Duke of York. The Duke of York was not an 
estimable person. • In a family that was rarely remarkable 
for the moral qualities of its members, he was conspicuous 
for his indifference to all the restraints that religion and 
civilisation impose upon humanity. But it pleased him to 
come forward on all possible occasions as the patron and 
champion of the Church of England, whenever that patronage 



CATHOLIC T: MANCIPATION 79 

and championship might be calculated to inflict an injury 
upon the professors of some other creed. In the Orange 
Society he saw an excellent opportunity for striking a blow 
at the Catholics of Ireland, whose claims, as he and the 
fiercer fanatics of Ascendency began to dread, were upon the 
eve of obtaining some recognition from the English Govern- 
ment. In the year 1797 he became a prominent patron of 
the Orange lodges in Ireland, and he seems to have made 
use of his power as Commander-in-Chief to encourage the 
formation of Orange- lodges in the regiments stationed in' 
Ireland, in direct defiance of military regulations. So bitter 
was his animosity to the Irish Catholics that more than a 
generation after the formation of the Orange lodges he called 
upon God to witness that he would never assent to the en- 
franchisement of the Irish people. This saying inspired 
Sheil with a fierce attack upon the Duke of York when the 
Duke's health was proposed at a public dinner at Mullingar. 
Naturally incensed by the proposal of such a toast in a 
Catholic assembly, the orator inveighed against the ducal 
patron of the Orange lodges with a vehemence which, for 
long enough, was prejudicial to his own career. 

When the Duke lay dying, a little later, Sheil, in a public' 
speech, gave utterance to what has been called an apology 
for his attack upon the Duke of York. He did, indeed, 
express some regret at the terms he had employed, but the 
manner in which he expressed that regret was scarcely likely 
to win his pardon in high quarters. 

' It is right,' exclaimed Sheil, ' that the offence which the 
Duke of York committed against our country should be com- 
mitted to forgetfulness. Indeed, it is almost unnecessary to 
express a desire which the natural oblivion that must befall 
the greatest as well as the humblest of mankind cannot fail 
to accomplish. In a month hence the Duke of York will be 
forgotten. The pomp of death will for a few nights fill the 
gilded apartments in which his body will lie in state. The 
artist will endeavour to avert the decay to wliich even princes 
are doomed, and embalm him with odours which may resist 



80 TRELA^D STIVOJE THE VNTOlSr 

the cadaverous scent for a while. He will be laid in a wind- 
ing-sheet fringed with silver and with gold ; he will be enclosed 
in spicy wood, and his illustrious descent and withered hopes 
will be inscribed upon his glittering coffin. The bell of St. 
Paul's will toll, and London — rich, luxurious, Babylonic 
London — will start at the recollection tliat even kings must 
die. . . . The coffin will go sadly and slowly down : its pon- 
derous mass will strike on the remains of its regal kindred ; 
the chant will be resumed, a moment's awful pause will take 
place — the marble vault, of which none but the Archangel 
shall disturb the slumbers, will be closed — the songs of death 
will cease — the procession will wind through the aisles again 
and restore them to their loneliness. The torches will fade 
again in the open daylight — the multitude of the great will 
gradually disperse ; they will roll back in their gilded chariots 
into the din and tumult of the great metropolis ; the business 
and the pursuits and the frivolities of life will be resumed, 
and the heir to the Three Kingdoms will be in a week for- 
gotten. We, too, shall forget ; but let us before we forget 
forgive him ! ' 

Such a speech, anim_ated with all the scorn and all the 
passion of Hebrew prophecy, and spoken as it was while the 
object of its scorn was still lingering in life, will serve to show 
the hatred which the fanatic and vindictive bigotry of a 
foreign prince could inspire in the mind of a statesman and 
an orator like Shell. 

While, however, the Duke of York had still more than 
twenty years to live, and the Orange Society was yet in its 
infancy, the position of the Catholics was pitiable in the 
extreme. The statesmen of the Union who had promised 
much had performed nothing ; the law still held nothing 
but terrors, the Government had nothing but hostility for 
Eoman Catlsolics. Under the benign Lord Lieutenantship of 
Lord Hardwicke all the judicial offences which had darkened 
the close of the eighteenth century and compelled insurrection 
were in full force. The vile old policy of shameless corruption 
on the one hand and shameless oppression on the other wag 



CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 81 

followed out Avith stubborn persistence. A purchased Press 
and a place-hunting minority strengthened the hands of the 
Executive and gave it full force and sanction for the hangings, 
the floggings, the transportations, and imprisonment which 
were so lavishly employed in order to make the Irish appreciate 
the blessings of the Act of Union. 

It is one of the most remarkable features of Ireland's 
history, however, that no oppression has ever retarded her 
steady and persistent advance towards freedom. The desire 
for liberty, like the torch in the old Greek game, is handed 
over from hand to hand. One runner may fail, grow faint 
and fall off, but there are always others ready to snatch the 
torch from his loosening grasp and carry it a further stage 
nearer to the goal. Emmet's insurrection had been only just 
crushed out ; the blood of the young leader was scarcely dry ; 
his body scarcely cold in the nameless grave which his dying 
bequest had left without an epitaph, when the new movement 
began which was destined to gratify one of the greatest and 
justest of Irish ambitions in a quarter of a century, and to 
culminate in unavailing revolution nearly half a century lattr. 

Pitt, the Prime Minister who had promised the Catholics 
their emancipation, was Prin:e Minister again, on the distinct 
understanding that he should make no concessions to the 
Catholics. The Irish Catholics resolved to combat this under- 
standing. The old Catholic Committee met in Dublin, drew 
up a petition and entrusted it to Lord Fingall and some other 
Catholic noblemen and gentlemen to place in the hands of 
Mr. Pitt. Pitt received the deputation with courtesy, and 
listened to their appeal with that unalterable composure 
which ' had produced so irritating an effect upon Edward 
Gibbon many a long year before when Pitt was little more 
than a lad, and had ventured to traverse some opinion of the 
historian of Rome. He absolutely refused to support the 
Catholic claims in anyway. Previous promises, early pledges 
he graciously admitted ; he was still, it seemed, an ardent 
advocate of Catholic relief; but just then Catholic relief was 
inexpedient, in fact, impossible. The deputation wasted its 

G 



82 T BEL AND SINCE THE UNION 

words and its wits upon the Minister. He was civil, smooth- 
spoken, and immovable. Pitt had in his hands the greatest 
chance ever offered to a statesman of ameliorating the condition 
of Ireland, and of damming a sea of troubles from many 
generations of men. But he had come into office on the con- 
dition that he was to be deaf to the voice of the Irish Catho- 
lics, and he preferred office to honour. Other ministers since 
Pitt have pursued a like policy, and with a like disastrous result. 

The disappointed deputation then turned from the Minister 
to the Opposition, and placed their petition in the hands of 
Lord Grenville and Mr. Fox. The question was the cause of 
long and eloquent debates in both houses, which ended in re- 
cording the vote of a small minority in favour of the Catholic 
claims and of an overwhelming majority against them. The 
debate is memorable especially because it was the occasion cf 
Grattan's first appearance in the English House of Commons. 
In spite of all the disadvantages of his voice and manner, in spite 
of the still greater disadvantage of a great reputation gained 
in another country and another assembly, Grattan's oratory 
earned an unqualified triumph. It was applauded by the 
Minister against whom it was levelled, and whose secret 
opinions it, no doubt, expressed while it censured his pubUc 
action. In vain, however, Grattan contended that the prin- 
ciple of religious liberty was equally sound whether apphed ' to 
constitution where it is freedom, or to empire where it is 
strength, or to religion where it is light.' In vain he con- 
demned the proscription which ' made in Ireland not only war 
but peace calamities.' In vain he told the attentive senate 
that ' what the best men in Ireland wished to do but could not 
do, the patriot courtier and the patriot oppositionist, you may 
accomplish.' Neither the genius of Grattan nor the genius 
of Fox could move or reduce the anti-Catholic majority, and 
the hopes of the Catholics were lowered to be raised again 
unexpectedly by an unforeseen accident, only to be dashed to 
earth again by another accident yet more unforeseen. 

On the 2nd of December, 1805, Napoleon defeated the 
armies of the allies at Austerlitz. On the 26th of January, 



CATHOLIC E3IANCIPATI0N 83 

in the following year, Pitt had ceased to live. Not for a moment 
before his death, it is said, did the ' Austerlitz look ' leave his 
face. His fears foresaw the unrestrained trimnph of Napoleon 
and the ruin of England ; his genius could not predict Mos- 
cow and Waterloo. The death of Pitt was immediately fol- 
lowed by the fall of the Pitt Administration and by the 
accession of the Opposition to power, nominally under Lord 
Grenville, but actually under the commanding influence of 
Fox. The hopes of the Catholics rose high. Pitt had been 
their most dangerous enemy ; Fox had promised to be, and 
seemed like to prove himself, their fastest friend. 

But the ingenious combination of the followers of Gren- 
ville, the followers of Fox, and the friends of Lord Sidmouth, 
which its friends proudly and its foes contemptuously styled the 
Ministry * of all the talents,' was not destined to do much for 
the Irish Catholics or for Ireland. Lord Hardwicke, indeed, 
freed Ireland from his obnoxious presence, and a Duke of 
Bedford held sway at the Castle in his stead — the same Duke 
who has earned a dishonourable immortality by his attack 
upon Burke, and by the magnificent reply with which Burke 
held his name up for ever to the contempt of posterity. 

But a change of viceroys meant little in Ireland. It was 
simply an Amurath succeeding to an Amurath. To this Duke 
the Catholics of Dublin presented an address expressing the 
hope that the new Government was prepared to accomplish 
Catholic relief. The Duke gave a guarded answer, but let it be 
noised abroad that as soon as Fox could convert his king the 
Catholics should reap the reward of their patience. Whether 
even Fox could ever have converted such a king must remain 
one of the most unanswerable speculations of history. At 
least, he did not convert him. We may well believe in the 
integrity of Fox's intentions, and in his loyalty to his convic- 
tions and his promises, but he was not allowed the time to 
ratify his pledges or to verify the hopes of those who depended 
upon him. In the September of that same year, 1806, which 
had opened with the death of Pitt, Fox himself was carried 
to Westminster Abbey. The two great rivals slept in neigh- 

g2 



84 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

bour graves, and the hopes of the Irish Catholics seemed to 
be buried in Fox's monument. 

The prophetic wisdom of Fox had warned the CathoHcs, 
on his accession to power, that the unpopukirity of their cause 
might mean the ruin of the Ministry that advocated it, and 
the accession of a Ministry formed on the avowed principle of 
defeating the Catholic claims, and so put all hope further off 
than ever. What he expected came to pass. The Ministry 
' of all the talents ' showed some signs of sympathy with the 
Roman Catholics. The grant to Maynooth was increased by 
5,000/. An effort was made to pass a Bill admitting Catho- 
lics to hold commissions in the army and the navy. Even 
this small concession to justice roused the passions of the 
bigot king. After it had passed the Commons he declared 
himself against it, and attempted to extort from his new 
Ministers the pledge he had successfully imposed upon Pitt, 
never again to importune his kingly ears with proposals to 
relieve the Catholics. The Ministers refused to make this 
humiliating concession, pushed their Bill through the Lords, 
and placed their resignation in the hands of the monarch. 
George immediately sent for Mr. Spencer Perceval, a man 
more after his own heart than Grey or Grenville, and en- 
trusted him with the task of forming the Ministry which, from 
its supple acceptance of the royal bigotry, came to be known 
by the nickname of the ' No-Popery Ministry.' Catholic relief 
was postponed for twenty years. 

The new Ministry began its work in no spirit of compro- 
mise or conciliation. It had come into office on the strength 
of its anti- Catholic pledges, and it was determined to retain 
its power by a thorough-going fulfilment of those pledges. 
New measures of coercion signalised their entrance into office, 
and the new measures of coercion were as usual followed by 
fresh outbreaks. In 1807 we hear for the first time of two 
desperate local factions, the Shanavests and Caravats, who 
seem to have agitated for a time very fiercely before they dis- 
appeared under the pressure of the law. Patronage, corrup- 
tion, and coercion held their familiar carnival. The grant to 



CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 80 

Maynooth was reduced, and in every possible way the Catho- 
lics were made to feel the enmity of the king and of his 
Ministers. But, though the hopes of the Catholics seemed to 
be dashed to the ground, they did not despair. They still 
agitated, still petitioned, still united. It was their darkest 
hour, but it heralded the dawn. The hour which had come 
had brought the man with it. The leader for whom Ireland 
was waiting was at hand. There was a young man in Dublin 
taking an active part in the work of the Catholic Com^^ittee 
whose name Ireland, England, and the world were destined 
to hear a great deal of. That name was Daniel O'Connell. 



CHAPTEE VII. 

DANIEL O'CONNELIi. 

The new leader in Irish politics was one of the strangest and 
most remarkable figures that had ever moved across its stormy 
scene. Unlike most of the later leaders of Irish national move- 
ments, Daniel O'Connell was a Catholic. The men of ninety- 
eight, Fitzgerald, O'Connor, Wolfe Tone, and Emmet, had 
all been members of the Protestant faith. Daniel O'Connell 
came of an old Catholic Kerry family. As Catholics, the 
O'Connells experienced the pressure of the Penal Laws. 
Morris O'Connell, the eldest son of the liberator's grandfather, 
held an estate that was not ' discoverable ' — that is to say, 
was not liable to be seized by any Protestant that chose to 
claim it, because it was held by leases conveyed prior to the 
enactment of the Penal Laws. Morgan O'Connell, Daniel 
O'Connell's father, though he was a rather large landowner, 
ruled his estate at his own risk, and through the forbearance 
of his Protestant neighbours. He held his lands through a 
trustee, who was, of course, a Protestant, and who would have 
been perfectly within his legal rights in violating his trust and 
seizing Morgan O'Connell's property. Nor was the mere 
fidelity of the trustee in itself a safeguard. Any other Pi'o- 



86 IBELAND SINCE THE UNION 

testaiit who eliose to file a Bill of Discovery could compel the 
trust to be disclosed, and could seize the estate without making 
any payment or compensation whatever to its Catholic pro- 
prietor. 

The O'Connell family was, in many ways, a remarkable 
one. Daniel O'Connell, the liberator's namesake and uncle, 
had liimself a story which reads like some of the most brilliant 
pages from the romance of adventure. The two-and- twentieth 
child, he entered tlie French service at an age when most boys 
are at school, and raised himself to high rank by his own 
merit. He served with signal distinction in many parts of the 
w^orld. He was in command of a large lumiber of foreign 
troops in Paris in 1789, and used often to declare, in his later 
years, that, if Louis XVI. had allowed him to act, the revolu- 
tion might have been crushed almost at its inception. After 
a long life of battle and adventure, he died as colonel in the 
British army in 1834, in his ninety-first year. 

The more famous Daniel O'Connell appears to have in- 
herited the courageous spirit and magnificent constitution of 
his warlike uncle, as well as his name. All his early years 
belonged to a time of great European excitement. While he 
was still but a child, his youthful ears were filled with the 
fame and fear of Paul Jones's name, and wdtli the desperate 
doings of the Bon Homme Bichard. Later on, he was at school 
in France at the very time wdien the Keign of Terror began, 
and it w^as only wdth considerable danger that he and his 
brother w^ere able to make their way back from France to 
Ireland. The packet-boat that conveyed them from Calais 
conveyed to England the tidings of the death of Louis XVI., 
and it also carried among its passengers two men whose names 
are famous in Irish history, tw^o men who were destined to 
play a prominent part in the insurrectionary movement of 
ninety-eight — the brothers John and Henry Sheares. It is 
said that John Sheares declared to those on board that he 
and his brother had been actually present at the execution of 
Louis XVI., having bribed two soldiers of the national guard 
to let them wear their uniforms, and take their places.. That 



DANIEL O'CONNELL 87 

was surely an ominous and fateful vessel which left France with 
such strange tidings and such a strange company. 

The tidings that France, in the words of Danton, * had 
answered Europe's challenge with the head of a king,' were but 
the bloody preface to a long series of terrible events which were 
destined at last to end in empire, after the revolution, like 
Saturn, had consumed its own children. The company was 
one of the strangest that chance had ever brought together 
on shipboard, for it included two men who were yet to stir up 
desperate rebellion against the foreign dominion, and who 
were doomed to die for the attempt, and included, too, the 
lad just fresh from college, who was fated to accomplish one 
portion of the freedom of his country, and to be himself the 
cause of another unsuccessful revolution. 

Daniel O'Connell's young manhood was passed chiefly in 
Dublin, at first studying for, and afterwards gradually work- 
i]ig his way to eminence at, the Bar. It is possible that his 
eager and active patriotism might have included him, too, 
in the struggle and ruin of ninety-eight but for an accident in a 
.street scuffle. The injuries received therein kept him in con- 
iinement during some of the most critical days in the history 
of the rebellion, and during this confinement he received 
sure and trusty warning of the Government's intimate know- 
ledge with every detail of the conspiracy. Whatever sympathy 
J'Connell might have felt for the United Irishmen then, he 
certainly felt none in his later days. He could not, we are 
told, forgive them for helping Pitt to pass the Union ; and in 
his eyes and in his words the heroes of the Irish people — 
Fitzgerald, Emmet, Tone — were only ' a gang of scoundrels.' 
When 1803 arrived, O'Connell had nothing to do with the 
revolutionary movement of Emmet. He was a prominent 
member of the lawyers' corps, and seems to have played an 
honourable part in attempting to defend the hves of unoffend- 
ing citizens against the panic-stricken excesses of the citizen 
soldiery. 

One of the chief characteristics of O'Connell's early life 
was courage. It neeced no small courage for a young man, 



88 IRELAND SINGE THE UNION 

and a Catholic, to lift up his voice loudly and eloquently 
against the Union at a meeting well-nigh overawed by the 
presence of an armed soldiery, under the command of the 
detested Major Sirr. At a time when the insurrection of 
Emmet was but an event of yesterday, and when the savage 
repression of obnoxious political opinions was the creed and 
the principle of the Irish Executive, the unknown young 
lawyer, who had at one time, according to his own words, 
' been almost a Tory,' dared to express himself as an eloquent 
and indignant opponent of the Union. It needed no small 
courage, too, for such a man to take upon himself, as he did 
a little later, the part of the champion of the Catholics of 
Ireland. At the time when O'Connell was rapidly making his 
way into the front rank of his profession, the Irish Catholics 
were reduced by oppression, by privation, and the Penal Laws 
to a condition of almost despairing apathy. They had no 
ambitions which they could hope to gratify ; they had no 
privileges as citizens ; they had almost no rights as human 
beings. 

Their attitude in most cases was not unnaturally that of 
the oppressed towards the oppressor, of the subjected to the 
conqueror, of the slave to the master. To be a Protestant 
meant, then, to belong to a dominant, privileged, and power- 
ful minority ; to be a Catholic meant to belcng to a degraded 
and outraged and an insulted majority. The liberties, tlm 
possessions, the very life of the Irish Catholic could hardly 
be called his own, and he had fallen in many cases into 
that listless torpor which is one of the most fatal symbols of 
vassalage. The intolerable cruelties of the Orange Society 
had here and there aroused a certain spirit of retaliation. 
The Eibbonmen sometimes met and met successfully the 
attacks upon their kin and their creed. But in the 
majority of cases Orangeism was all powerful. If a Lord- 
Lieutenant administered the law after a fashion displeasing to 
them, as Wellesley did, he was made the victim of an organised 
attack for which the offenders were never brought to book. 
Conviction of an Orangeman was practically impossible, as he 



BANIEL aCONNELL 89 

was sure to be tried before an Orange jury ; conviction of 
a Catholic was certain, for the same reason. No wonder if 
the Irish CathoKcs as a class were broken-spirited and 
apathetic. It was for this class, which had for so long been 
silent, that a young man of their own faith now dared to come 
forward, not merely as their defender, but as their vindicator 
and justifier. The tone of plaintive apology which had been 
so familiar in the mouths of some advocates of the Catholic 
cause was never adopted by O'Connell. From the first he 
held his head high, and cared for no man. From the first he 
adopted an attitude of defiance, and a tone of even aggressive 
scorn of his opponents. He fought the Catholic cause in 
all places and in all seasons, on the public platform and 
in the crowded court-room, with an eloquence which was 
not less remarkable for its power than for its passion, for its 
beauty than for its bitterness, for its admirable arguments 
in favour of its cause, than for its merciless attacks upon his 
powerful adversaries. 

It was a new thing for the Irish Catholics to see a man of 
their own creed rising up from their midst to assail the As- 
cendency with all the weapons of wit, and scorn, and satire, 
and invective of which O'Connell was then and always so 
complete a master. Fearless and serene, he assailed the 
dominant class after a fashion to which they were indeed un- 
accustomed, and the surprise of the Catholics, on discovering 
such a defender, can scarcely have been greater than that of 
the Ascendency in finding that the despised Catholics had 
found at last a tongue that was more terrible to them than 
the sword. A Spartan gentleman of some twenty centuries 
since, or a Virginian gentleman of one century ago, would 
scarcely have been more amazed if Helot or Blackamoor had 
risen up to agitate against them, and to hold them up to con- 
tempt and derision, than the Castle clique must have been 
when they gradually awoke to the growing influence of 
O'Connell. 

Sometimes when Irishmen are disposed, and not unnatu- 
rally, to deal somewhat hardly with various passages in 



90 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

O'Connell's life, when they think of his more than servile 
homage to royalty, when they remember how he waded into the 
waters of Kingstown Harbour to greet with servile welcome 
the basest of the Georges, when they reflect upon his unjust 
denunciation of the United Irishmen, and his unbridled and 
unhappy animosity to Young Ireland, when they think of him 
as the patron of a little army of placemen, they would do 
well to season their indignation by dwelling upon the great 
things he did accomplish for Ireland. The strength of a 
chain may lie in its weakest part ; but the career of a great 
man must be tested not where it has failed but where it 
has succeeded. We should not, in the words of the dying 
Antony, lament nor sorrow too much over some passages 
in O'Connell's life, but please our thoughts by feeding them 
on those of his former fortunes, wherein he lived the greatest 
of Irishmen, the noblest. He dared the hatred of England. 
He courted poverty, he abandoned all the highways of per- 
sonal success for the sake of the cause he honoured, and the 
country from which he sprang. He could not have foreseen 
that the cause would carry him to greatness, and give him an 
immortal memory. 

It was a favourite taunt of his English opponents in later 
years to call him ' the big beggarman,' and to point the finger 
of scorn at him because he accepted a tribute from the nation 
he redeemed. If such a taunt needed any answer at all, i\, 
v>^as answered by O'Connell himself in the pathetic words in 
which he speaks of his early toils and hardships, of his labor- 
ious youth and its incessant studies, and of the promising and 
lucrative career from which he always found time, when time 
was as precious as gold, to labour for the Catholic cause, and 
which in the end he gave up altogether, in order to devote 
himself with greater singleness of purpose to the service of his 
country. 

In the Conservative press of to-day, O'Connell is exalted 
at the expense of Mr. Parnell. Eloquent tributes are paid to 
the genius, the integrity, and the honour of the great orator ; 
melancholy regrets expressed for the leader of the past who 



DANIEL a CONN ELL 91 

contrasts so worthily with the leader of the present. Irish- 
men are assured that if only Ireland had such a man as 
O'Connell at her head, her demands would be more readily 
listened to by her appreciative rulers. Yet if Irishmen took 
the trouble to refer back to the dusty files of the newspapers 
of O'Connell's time, they would not find there any evidence 
of this latter-day admiration. Then no epithet was strong 
enough, no adjective sufficiently offensive to fling at O'Con- 
nell's name. It is an undoubted reputable fact that a 
hostile press raved itself into sheer hysterics of hatred against 
him. Writers who would have been sane and sensible enough 
in treating of the political life of old Eome or modern Paris, 
lost their heads completely when they came to speak of O'Con- 
nell, and could do nothing better than to bellow at him in 
blind fury of abuse. The coarsest vituperation was daily poured 
upon O'Connell by a generation certain of whose children to- 
day point to him in admiration, and appeal to his memory as 
to a holy spell, with which to conjure hence the modern spirit 
of Irish patriotism. 

Upon O'Connell this whirlwind of objurgations had little or 
no effect. Those who assailed him he could assail again ; 
those who abused him he could abuse yet more roundly. He 
could meet the ferocity of his opponents with a ferocity of his 
own, far more acrid and far more galling. His marvellous 
eloquence made him more than a match for the ablest of his 
opponents. It is not easy for us of to-day to judge of the 
effects of that eloquence. O'Connell's speeches are not such 
delightful reading as the speeches of Grattan, or of Slieil, or 
of Meagher. We, as we read, can hear no echo of that mar- 
vellous voice which all who ever heard it agree in pronouncing 
well-nigh unsurpassable in its beauty. Other speakers, far 
greater than O'Connell in their mastery of words, in the ful- 
ness of their thoughts, in the splendours of their literary form, 
seemed to dwindle into insignificance as orators beside him, 
when their feeble voices, harsh delivery, and uncouth gestures 
were contrasted with the magnificence of his voice and the 
majesty of his presence. 



92 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Men of the most varied types, and of the most differing 
political opinions, agreed in a common admiration of 
O'Connell's oratorical powers. Lord Jeffrey, Mr. Roebuck, 
Lord Beaconsfield, Lord Lytton, and Charles Dickens, have 
all borne impressive testimony to the spell of O'Connell's 
eloquence. Charles Dickens tells how, when he was once 
reporting a speech of O'Connell's in the House of Commons 
on one of the tithe-riots, he was so touched and moved by its 
exquisite pathos, that he was compelled to hold his hand, to 
lay down his pencil, and to listen motionless. The late Lord 
Lytton, in his poem, ' St. Stephen's,' has given a very poetic 
description of the impression produced on him by hearing 
O'Connell speak at a great public meeting in Ireland. * Then,' 
says Lord Lytton, ' did I know what spells of infinite choice 

To rouse or lull, has the sweet human voice ; 
Then did I seem to seize the sudden clue 
To the grand troublous life antique — to view 
Under the rock-stand of Demosthenes, 
Mutable Athens heave her noisy seas.' 

Such was the man who had now come forward to take the 
lead in Lish politics, and to press upon the English Govern- 
ment the twin national demand for Catholic Emancipation 
and for the repeal of the Union. The repeal of the Union 
had been one of the earliest themes of O'Connell's eloquence ; 
but it was to Catholic Emancipation that he devoted himself 
actively in the earlier period of his career, and it was over 
Catholic Emancipation that he achieved his greatest triumph, 
and rendered the greatest service to his country. 

He was not unnaturally hated — and feared as well as 
hated — by the Ascendency. They suddenly saw their rule, 
which had been preserved so successfully from the dangers of 
more than one revolution, now threatened by a danger more 
deadly to their privileges than revolution itself. The power of 
eloquence, which has upset thrones and exiled princes in 
all the cities and empires of the world, the eloquence that 
appeals to and animates and unites a vast body of the people 
in one common purpose, was now levelled against them* 



DANIEL 0' CONN ELL 93 

O'Connell's was no mere eloquence of the senate or of tlie 
school ; it was as much at home on the hillside as in the 
council-chamber, upon the hustings as in the hall. It did 
not need for its audience a chosen group of cultivated, 
educated men. It stirred the blood and fired the mind of the 
humblest peasant with the same national pulsations and 
aspirations that it gave to the statesman and to the scholar. 

His opponents had no eloquence of their own to pit 
against that of this people's tribune ; but there still existed a 
tradition of another means of silencing a too eloquent oppo- 
nent. The duel was still one of the cherished institutions of 
political life in the early part of the present century. A duel 
was forced upon O'Connell. His opponent, Mr. D'Esterre, 
appears to have been an unconscious tool of party faction. 
O'Connell and he met, and exchanged shots ; and O'Connell 
wounded his adversary so severely that he died a few days 
after. That practically ended any idea of silencing O'Connell 
by wager of battle. It left, however, a profoundly-lasting, 
melancholy impression upon the mind of O'Connell himself. 
He bitterly regretted the death of his adversary ; and that 
life-long regret must be taken very largely into account in 
considering the strong and unchanged opposition always 
offered by O'Connell to any struggle for freedom which could 
possibly involve the shedding of human blood or the loss of 
human life. 

In the May of 1829 the English House of Commons was 
the theatre of the last act in a great religious and political 
movement. A man had made his appearance on the floor of 
the House as the chosen representative of an Irish county, 
who was the object of the keenest curiosity to an assembly 
crowded beyond its custom. The galleries and the avenues 
of the House were filled with individuals anxious to learn as 
soon as possible the result of a certain event. Every eye in 
the Chamber was riveted on the stranger who waited with 
grave unmoved countenance for the moment when Mr. 
Speaker rising from his seat should desire new members to 
come to the table ; the name of the stranger and the name of 



94 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the constituency which he came there to represent were on 
every lip. The name of the constituency was the County 
Clare, and of its representative Daniel O'Connell. Well 
might the members of that thronged Senate gaze with eager 
interest on the stranger within their gates. He stood there 
as the champion of a cause and of a creed which had long 
been championless ; he came as a conqueror in the name of 
those who had been conquered. Centuiies of pain and 
passion, of injustice and of degradation worse than death, had 
found in this man their apostle and their vindicator. The 
Catholics of Ireland, so long the last among the nations, so 
long the outcasts of the law, the scorn of power and the sport 
of princes, were entering at last into the dearest of all human 
inheritances, and they owed their disenthrallment to the man 
of genius who waited in Westminster on that afternoon of 
early summer with the eyes of the world upon him. 

How much this man had accomplished ! Against the 
hostility of the Ascendency ; against the apathy of his own 
people steeped in the Lethe of long oppression ; against the 
soldiers of Sirr and the pistol of D'Esterre ; against Veto and 
the friends of Veto ; against Quarantotti advocating conces- 
sion over in Kome, and Fingall counselling compromise at 
liome in Dublin ; against Canning aiid Castlereagli resolu- 
tions ; against Government prosecutions and State proscrip- 
tions, this man had fought his way. A new Titan, he had 
scaled Olympus and demanded admission into tlie councils of 
the Immortals. A Catholic, he came to the British House of 
Commons to champion the rights of his co-religionists, which 
at that very moment the Government had granted, owing in 
no small degree to his labours, toils, and energy. 

When O'Connell stood below the bar of the House, the 
House was but fresh from the discussions on the Catholic 
Emancipation I^ill, Avhieh had been introduced in order to 
avoid civil war. That Ireland was raised from the stagnation 
of slavery to a mood in which she was ready to fight for her 
faith and freedom of conscience was in a great degree due to 
O'Connell. It is, of course, certain that in course of time 



DANIEL O'CONNELL 93 

Catholic Emancipation must have been conceded if there had 
been no O'Connell— if O'Connell had died of that fever which 
threatened his young manhood. But it would not have been 
conceded so soon. His indomitable energy, his unwearying 
patience, his marvellous eloquence had stimulated his friends, 
had formed a following, had frightened his foes, and now in 
this mid-May of 1829, Catholic Emancipation was an accom- 
plished fact of some few days old. The Clare election was 
the immediate cause of Emancipation, and it was as the 
chosen of that struggle that O'Connell now waited to take his 
place in the House of Commons. 

The Clare election was the great event of the day. The 
Duke of Wellington was at the head of the Tory Ministry 
which had just succeeded to the temporary and trumpery 
Goderich Administration. Lord John Kussell had carried 
the Kepeal of the Test Act and the Corporation Act, and this 
moderate measure of reform had offended Sir Kobert Peel's 
supporters, and there were several secessions from the Cabinet. 
The vacant place of President of the Board of Trade was 
offered to Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, member for the county of 
Clare. Mr. Fitzgerald accepted the offer, and as the assump- 
tion of office necessitated re-election, he immediately issued 
his address to his constituents. It is possible that he did not 
expect opposition ; it is practically certain that the idea of his 
not being returned never occurred either to himself or to his 
friends. He considered his seat for Clare County to be as 
much his personal property as his hat. 

The Catholics, it is true, had passed a resolution pledging 
themselves to oppose every candidate who was not sworn to 
oppose the Duke of Wellington's Government. Even this 
pledge did not at first appear very inimical to Mr. Fitzgerald's 
peaceful return. The Whigs as well as the Tories were 
desirous to see him re-elected. Lord John Russell had the 
audacity to suggest to O'Connell that Mr. Fitzgerald should 
be allowed to be returned unopposed, and for a short time 
O'Connell had the weakness to hesitate as to his line of con- 
duct. But if the leader for a moment faltered or paltered the 



96 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION • 

country was in no compromising temper. O'Connell soon 
saw that Clare must be contested, and the only question left 
to answer was, ' By whom ? ' A Major M'Namara was sug- 
gested, but Major M'Namara declined to trouble the peace of 
Mr. Fitzgei^ald. There was a brief period of suspense, and 
then the three kingdoms were startled by the intelligence 
that O'Connell himself was coming forward to contest Clare. 

At that time it was impossible for a Catholic to enter 
Parliament. The law did not indeed prohibit him from 
standing, from being returned, from crossing the seas to 
Westminster ; but on the threshold of St. Stephen's he was 
called upon to take an infamous oath, and by a shameful 
shibboleth he was excluded from his rights. O'Connell could 
not take this oath, but he saw that the hour had come when 
the appearance of an Irish Catholic at the bar of the English 
House of Commons, demanding to be sworn according to his 
conscience and his creed, and supported in his demand by 
millions of fellow-countrymen and fellow-believers, would have 
an effect well-nigh irresistible upon the Government. He was 
making a bold stroke, and he knew it. The Government 
knew it too, and both sides strained every nerve for victory. 

O'Connell, like Toussaint L'Ouverture in Wordsworth's 
poem, had great allies— with him were exaltations, agonies, 
and love ; and man's unconquerable mind. The sympathies 
of the people, newly awakened to a sense of their power, were 
with him. He had aroused a nation and made himself its 
leader. The whole story of the fight in the County Clare is 
one of the most exciting, as it is one of the most important, 
in the record of contested elections in Ireland. O'Connell was 
aided in his campaign by able and remarkable lieutenants, two 
of them especially remarkable. The Clare election seems a 
thing of the past, seems to belong to ancient history. More 
than half a century has since gone by, a half century big with 
importance to the Irish people. Well-nigh two generations of 
men have come and gone since O'Connell came forward on the 
Clare hustings, and no generation of Irishmen has ever wit- 
nessed or taken part in events more fateful to their country- 



DANIEL O'CONNELL 97 

It is a lialf-century wliicli has witnessed two armed risings in 
Ireland, a half-century of incessant coercive laws, a half- 
century that has seen the Irish race dwindle by millions 
through famine and emigration, a half-century that has seen 
a new Irish race grow-up on the other side of the Atlantic, no 
less patriotic, no less determined than their kindred in the 
parent island ; a half-century that has seen extorted from re- 
luctant Ministers concession after concession, and piecemeal 
measures of reform. Such a half-century lies between us of 
to-day and the men of the Clare election. The big events of 
such an interval in themselves seem well-nigh to double the 
actual length of time, and O'Connell and his compeers appear 
almost as far from us, almost as much the mighty ghosts of 
heroes as Emmet, or Grattan, or the men of ninety- eight. 

Yet there is a man now living, a man lately sitting in the 
English Parliament for that same county of Clare, a follower 
of Mr. Parnell to-day, who, more than fifty years ago, was 
most conspicuous among the champions and supporters of 
O'Connell during the stormy days of the Clare election. 
Colonel The O'Gorman Mahon was one of the most remarkable 
figures in the Parliament of 1880-1885. The historic muse, ob- 
serving with admiration his stahvart form, his stately presence 
and youthful carriage, holds her breath, and refuses to whisper 
the age of the veteran politician. The vv^ildest rumours cir- 
culate as to the years and the adventures of a man who played 
a prominent part in Irish politics long before most of his 
recent colleagues v/ere born ; who brought O'Connell forward 
for Clare and who was in Parliament some fifty years before 
his connection with Mr. Parnell's party. The intervening 
half-century he spent in all parts of the world, soldiering, 
sailoring, travelling, enjoying adventure for its own sake. He 
took a considerable share in making the history of one of the 
South American republics. Eumour says of him that at one 
time he was not merely Lord High Admiral of its fleet, but 
Generalissimo of its army as well, a di\aded duty which may, 
however, be regarded as savouring of exaggeration. He was 
in Parliament again from 1847 to 1852 ; he came in for the 

H 



98 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

third time in 1879. In 1885 he did not present himself for 
re-election. His parliamentary friends were fond of rallying 
him for his supposed antiquity, but there was no young man 
in the Irish party, or, indeed, in the House of Commons, 
who carried his head more erect, walked with a firmer step, 
or showed less evidence of the weight of years than The 
O'Gorman Mahon. 

Such is The O'Gorman Mahon to-day ; here is what The 
O'Gorman Mahon was more than fifty years ago : ' He would 
deserve to stand apart in a port'-ait. Nature has been peculi- 
arly favourable to him. He has a very striking physiognomy, 
of the Corsair character, which the Protestant Gulnares and 
the Catholic Medoras find it equally difficult to resist. His 
figure is tall, and he is particularly free and degage in all his 
attitudes and movements. In any other his attire would 
appear singularly fantastical. His manners are exceedingly 
frank and natural, and have a character of kindliness as well 
as of self-reliance imprinted upon them. He is wholly free 
from embarrassment, and carries a well-founded consciousness 
of his personal merit ; which is, however, so well united with 
urbanity, that it is not in the slightest degree offensive. His 
talents as a popular speaker are considerable. He derives 
from external qualifications an influence over the multitude, 
which men of diminutive stature are somewhat slow in ob- 
taining. A small man is at first regarded by the great body 
of spectators with disrelish ; and it is only by force of phrase, 
and by the charm of speech, that he can at length succeed in 
inducing his auditors to overlook any infelicity of configura- 
tion ; but when O'Gorman Mahon throws himself out before 
the people, and touching his whiskers with one hand brandishes 
the other, an enthusiasm is at once produced to which the 
fair portion of the spectators lend their tender contribution. 
Such a man was exactly adapted to the excitement of the 
people of Clare, and it must be admitted that, by his indefati- 
gable exertions, his unremitting activity, and his devoted zeal, 
he most materially assisted in the election of Mr. O'Connell.' 

The words which we have quoted are the words of another 



DANIEL O'CONNELL 99 

of the lieutenants of O'Connell, of Richard Lalor Sheih The 
name and the fame of Sheil have been too much suffered to 
fade into obscurity of late. Ireland has produced a long and 
illustrious succession of famous orators. The names of 
Grattan, of Plunket, of Meagher — not to mention the names of 
living men— shine like stars, but in the splendid galaxy no 
name is more luminous than the name of Sheil. His oratory 
deserves something of the careful study which is given to 
Cicero or to Mirabeau. Few public speakers have been 
masters of a more glowing style, have shown such a rich 
command of words, have made such gorgious use of ornament 
which never became trivial because it never ceased to be 
majestic. 

English statesmen of both parties have combined to pay 
striking tribute to the eloquence and to the genius of Sheil. 
Lord Beaconsfield, in one of the most famous of his novels, 
awards to Sheil enthusiastic praise, and contrasts him 
favourably with the great English orator Canning. Mr. 
Gladstone described Sheil not very long ago as one of the 
three great speakers who had come to success in spite of 
conspicuous personal defects of manner and of voice. Dr. 
Chalmers and Dr. Newman were the two examples chosen 
by Mr. Gladstone. Of Sheil he wrote that ' his voice 
resembled the sound produced by a tin-kettle battered about 
from place to place.' * In anybody else,' Mr. Gladstone went 
on to say, * I would not, if it had been my choice, like to have 
listened to that voice ; but in him I would not have changed 
it, for it was part of a most remarkable whole, and nobody 
ever felt it painful while listening to it. He was a great 
orator, and an orator of much preparation, I believe, carried 
even to words, with a very vivid imagination, and an enor- 
mous power of language and of strong feeling. There was a 
peculiar character, a sort of half-wildness in his aspect and 
delivery ; his whole figure, and his delivery, and his voice, 
and his matter were all in such perfect keeping with one 
another that they formed a great Parliamentary picture ; and, 
although it is now thirty-five years since I heard Mr. Sheil, 

h2 



100 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

my recollection of him is just as vivid as if I had been listen- 
ing to him to-day.' Such was the man and such the eloquence 
which was enabled to render O'Connell sterling service in the 
fight of Clare, a fight of which the most brilliant and fascina- 
ting picture has been left us by the pen of Shell himself. 

These events and this man were in the minds of that 
crowded assembly as they watched O'Connell standing below 
the bar of the House between Lord Ebrington and Lord 
Duncannon. Presently, the Speaker rose, and called upon 
new members desirous of taking the oath to come fco the table. 
O'Connell advanced between his mtroducers to take the oath. 
It had been O'Connell's intention, when originally he stood 
for Clare, to come to the House of Commons and to refuse 
to take the shameful oath then tendered to Catholics. He 
believed that the result of such a daring step would be to 
advance materially the cause of Catholic Emancipation. But 
the cause of Catholic Emancipation had not to wait for that. 
The Clare election settled the matter, and between the time 
when O'Connell came forward to contest the county and the 
time when he stood at the bar of the House waiting to be 
sworn. Catholic Emancipation had become the law of the 
land. 

With petty ingenuity, however, Sir Eobert Peel had pro- 
vided that only those who should be returned as members to 
the House of Commons ' after the commencement of that Act ' 
should be allowed to take their seats under the new oaths. 
O'Connell had been returned before the Bill became law, and 
against him this retrospective clause was levelled. He, of 
course, refused to take the infamous form of oath which, 
except to him, was never again to be offered to a Catholic. 
He was directed to withdraw, and he did so. An animated 
discussion at once sprang up as to whether or not he should 
be heard at the bar of the House in his own defence. The 
debate was continued upon another day, and for three days 
in all this matter occupied the attention of the House. 
O'Connell was finally allowed to speak in his own defence at 
the bar. He made a long and eloquent speech. The old 



BANIEL O'CONNELL 101 

offensive oath was again tendered to him, and again he refused 
to take it in words which are now historic. He dechned to 
take the oath because ' one part of it he knew to be false, and 
another he did not beheve to be true.' A new writ was 
issued for the County Clare. But the action of Sir Robert 
Peel had no further effect than of allowing O'Connell a further 
triumph. He was, of course, immediately re-elected. 

If the party that opposed O'Connell then are inclined to 
laud him now they are not alone. The Whigs, who feared 
or hated him in his life, who reviled him in their press and 
in their speeches, who alternately cajoled and calumniated 
him, as their fear or their hate rose uppermost ; the fossil 
Whigs, the ruined remnant of a great party whose power is 
gone, and whose principles are as extinct as the dodo or the 
dynasties of the Shepherd- Kings ; the Whigs whom O'Connell 
himself bitterly satirized are not now unwilling to pay 
O'Connell some empty honours, and to offer to his memory the 
respect which they denied him in the flesh. It is no com- 
mendation to O'Connell in the eyes of his sincere admirers 
that his merits are extolled at the expense of his political 
successors ; it is to the supporter of the Melbourne Govern- 
ment, it is to O'Coiniell the enemy of Young Ireland, it is to 
the O'Connell of his later and failing years that his latter-day 
enthusiasts offer their unneeded tribute. 

The Irish people owe much to O'Connell. They owe to 
him the privilege of professing in freedom the faith of their 
fathers ; they owe to him the long agitation against the 
Union which kept alive the spirit of patriotism, and obeyed 
the commands of Grattan to keep knocking at the Union. They 
can forgive him for his falling off, for his unwise alliance with 
the Whigs ; they ca.n forgive him for the praise with which 
Tory politicians now load his memory, in consideration of 
the contumely which Tory politicians heaped upon the living 
man. As they think of O'Connell they hear rather the 
echoing crash of the sword which fell from the hands of the 
effigy of Walker on the day when the Act of CathoUc Emanci- 
pation received the royal signature, than the voice of Young 



J 02 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Ireland protesting against the inaction that was betraying 
them. 

The Clare election was the last act of the long struggle 
for Catholic Emancipation. It may be regarded as the preface 
or prelude to a struggle equally great, equally arduous, but 
not equally successful — the struggle for Eepeal. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

THE TITHE WAE. 

It has already been mentioned that on one occasion, when 
Daniel O'Connell was speaking in the English House of Com- 
mons, his eloquence was so touching that Charles Dickens, who 
was reporting in the gallery of the House, laid down his pen, 
and was unable from very emotion to proceed with his work. 
The speech which so powerfully affected the great English 
novelist was one of the many speeches uttered by O'Connell 
with regard to what is now known in history as the Tithe 
War. O'Connell was giving an account of a tithe riot. 
He described how, during the struggle between the people on 
the one side and the police who were collecting parsons' tithes 
on tlie other, a blind man was led near to the scene of strife 
by his little daughter. A police man's bullet, recklessly dis- 
charged, found its billet in the body of the child and killed 
licv ; and the blind man suddenly discovered that his little 
ruide and com.panion had fallen lifeless in his arms, with her 
waim blood running over him. It is not surprising that the 
picture of such a scene, told as O'Connell could tell it, should 
have compelled one who was destined himself to be one of the 
greatest masters of pathos in the English language to stay his 
hand and drop his pen, and find himself unable to proceed 
with his task. 

Such scenes as that described by O'Connell were only too 
common, only too frequent, during that terrible Tithe War. 
k^ucli events have been neither uncommon nor unfrequent 



THE TITHE WAR 103 

since, whenever the people have come into conflict with 
the ministers of oppressive laws. But, during the fearful 
years of the Tithe War, scenes of bloodshed and of death were 
of such ordinary occurrence that their recital in the end 
became part of the commonplaces of parliamentary debate, 
and Ministerialists listened at last almost with indifference to 
details that must have shocked them deeply when they were first 
recounted. I know of hardly any more melancholy reading in 
the world than to take down the volumes of Hansard for these 
early years of the decade of 1830, and to read in them the 
debates on the question of tithes. O'Connell's genius never 
reached loftier heights of eloquence, and was never devoted to a 
nobler purpose than in those burning words with which, again 
and again, he sought to impress upon a hostile assembly and 
an inimical Ministry the terrible injuries and injustice under 
which the Irish peasant was suffering. 

The Tithe question was the natural — or rather the un- 
natural — offspring of the system of the Penal Laws. The 
I'ulers of Ireland had done their best for generations to crush 
out the national faith of the country by a code of which 
it has been well said that it could never have been prac- 
tised in hell, or it would have overturned the kingdom of 
ikelzebub. When, at length, after generations of patient 
agony, the Penal Code became a thing of the past, and its 
obnoxious principles were dissipated to the free air ; when at 
last the common rights of humanity and citizenship were 
granted to Catholics, and Irish Catholics sat and spoke and 
voted in the English House of Commons, even then As- 
cendency did its best to oppress and outrage the national 
creed. The Catholic Church was no longer directly persecuted, 
but the English Protestant Church was still the State Church 
of Ireland, supported by contributions exacted at the point of 
the bayonet from a people who did not believe the tenets of 
their Church, and to whom that Church had been for centuries 
the symbol of a relentless oppression. 

It is scarcely surprising that the Irish people should have 
protested against being compelled to pay tithes to the pro- 



104 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

fessors of a creed which was not their creed, and for the 
support of churches over whose thresholds their feet never 
passed. Against this extraordinary imposition, justifiable by 
no principle whatever beyond the old blunt, brutal principle 
of the might that maketh right, the Irish peasant protested 
bitterly. Sometimes he carried his protest farther than mere 
words, and refused to pay the hateful tribute. Then the 
followers of the foreign Church called in the aid of arms. 
The tithes demanded in the name of religion were enforced by 
soldiers, and by police. If the peasant resisted, he was shot 
down. 

A great English writer, Sydney Smith, had the courage to 
protest against the infamous exactions of the so-called Irish 
Church. ' There is no cruelty like it in all Europe, in all 
Asia, in all the discovered parts of Africa, and in all we have 
ever heard of Timbuctoo.' Sydney Smith draws a powerful 
and vigorous contrast between the influence of the Esta- 
blished Church and the National Church on the Irish peasantry. 
' On the Irish Sabbath, the bell of a neat parish church often 
summons to church only the parson and an occasionally con- 
forming clerk ; while, a hundred yards off, a thousand 
Catholics are huddled together in a miserable hovel, and pelted 
by all the storms of heaven.' To support that parson and his 
* occasionally conforming clerk,' the bayonets and the bullets 
of a military force were employed against the impoverished 
Catholic peasantry. The stones of that ' neat parish church ' 
were too often cemented by the blood of its victims. The 
Tithe question v/as the cause of a kind of perpetually-smould- 
ering civil war. To the collection of tithes in Ireland Sydney 
Smith concluded that in all probability a million of lives may 
have been sacrificed. 

The Tithe question practically came to a head in conse- 
quence of a controversy in the county of Kildare. A Protes- 
tant curate of a Kildare parish obtained a rate for the purpose 
of rebuilding the parish church, by packing the vestry with 
Protestants. The example thus afforded, Protestant curates 
in other parts of the country were not slow to follow. The 



THU TITHE WAR 105 

vast body of Catholic parishioners, justly incensed by this un- 
fair additional levy, bound themselves into a solemn league 
and covenant against the payment of tithes and church cess. 
They resolved never again to meet these impositions with a 
voluntary money payment. The anti-tithe feeling ran high 
in Kildare. For many reasons the Catholic clergy — though, 
no doubt, as legally liable to pay tithes as any other parish- 
ioners — were usually, by a kind of half-hearted courtesy, 
exempted from the imposition. One of the Protestant clergy- 
men in Kildare broke through this rule, and called upon a 
Catholic priest to pay his tithes, and, in default, seized upon 
the priest's horse. From the pulpit the priest condemned the 
whole disgraceful tithe system. The people began to offer 
more and more opposition to the imposition. The Protestant 
clergymen attempted to seize the cattle of Catholic fanners 
who refused to pay tithes. They called the police to their aid, 
and turned them, for the time being, into a force of cattle- 
lifters, or rather of would-be cattle lifters, for in most cases 
the police were unable to seize the beasts of the rebellious 
farmers. 

As soon as it became noised abroad that a Protestant 
clergyman had appealed to the police, and that the police were 
going to make a descent upon the fields of some farmer, the 
cattle were locked up ; and the law did not allow the police 
to break an entrance into barn or stable in order to seize 
upon them. In the rare cases in which the police were quick 
enough to lay hands upon the cattle in the fields, their triumph 
was merely nominal. When the beasts were put up for public 
sale no one thought of bidding for them except the owner, 
who, in consequence, got his beasts back again at a merely 
nominal price. 

The organised opposition to the paying of tithes began to 
spread rapidly from county to county over the whole of Ireland. 
Under the amiable legislative system then in force, it was not 
legal for the Irish people to hold public meetings in their own 
country. But the law, which was clumsy as well as cruel, 
could be evaded. It was illegal to summon public meetings, 



106 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

and so no public meeting was summoned. But it was not 
illegal for the people of a particular town or parish to announce 
that on a certain day they were going to have ahurhng match, 
and it was not illegal for the people of other counties and 
towns and parishes to come and take part in the national 
sport. It was perfectly plain, however, that the large assem- 
blages that thus came together met not for the purpose of 
ball-playing, but for the purpose of opposing a strong front 
to the hated tithe system. Men came to these hurling 
matches to talk of other topics than balls and sticks. 
These hurling matches became the recognised medium of 
public opinion, and the public opinion of Ireland was dead 
against the payment of tithes. That public opinion hinted 
pretty plainly to those who were willing, for peace and quietness, 
to pay tithes to their Protestant masters, that such payment 
would not necessarily secure to them peace and quietness. 

The organised opposition spread and flourished. The 
Government, with all its strength, was powerless against it. 
When a man was put into prison for refusing to pay his tithes, 
or for refusing to pay his rent — for the agitation against tithes 
was beginning to grow into an agitation against rent as well — 
the Government were unable to obtain a conviction against 
him. At last even the Government began to see that further 
struggle was futile, and that concession and compromise were 
inevitable. Not all the king's horses nor all the king's men 
could enforce an unwilling and united people to pay the 
detested tribute. ' The loss of life in exacting the tribute was 
terrible. That in itself was beginning to have a great effect 
upon the public mind. But the loss of money was also 
very heavy indeed. More money was spent in some petty 
parish in the attempt to enforce payment, and in the military 
movement consequent upon that attempt, than perhaps the 
tithes for a whole generation were worth. The Protestant 
clergymen, too, were growing heartily sick of the whole 
business. Many of them— indeed, most of them — came to 
hate the system which extorted, or tried to extort, their tithes 
with such a waste of blood and loss of life. 



TRE TITHE WAR 107 

Moreover, their own interests were suffering severely. The 
tithes were not paid ; and they took care to let the Govern- 
ment know that they would offer no opposition to some other 
method which would make them more securely masters of 
their means of livelihood. Then the Government set its 
usual machinery to work. Committees of Lords and Com- 
mons met and reported ; and their reports were submitted to 
Parliament, and Parliament read them, and debated over them, 
and wrangled over them ; and did little or nothing for long 
enough to settle the question satisfactorily. Temporary mea- 
sures were brought in, which relieved the wants of the Pro- 
testant clergymen, and which left the task of collecting the 
tithes sometimes to compounding landlords, and sometimes to 
the Irish Executive. 

But the Executive found it no easier to obtain the tithes 
than the parsons had found it. The arrears of tithes grew 
and grew till, in 1833, they amounted to considerably over a 
million of money. Ministries came and went, year succeeded 
year, and still found the English Parliament perplexed by the 
Tithe question, the Irish Executive helplessly attempting to 
enforce tithes, and the Irish people stubbornly resolved not to 
pay them. The country was growmg more and more disturbed. 
The cost of the quarrel was growing heavier and heavier to 
the Government, and it was made plain in one of the debates 
in Parliament in 1834, that for some eight years England was 
compelled to maintain in Ireland an army well-nigh as 
strong as that which they thought to be necessary to support 
their will in India. In the year 1833 this military force had 
cost mere tha.n a million of money : 26,000L had been spent 
in collecting 12,000Z. worth of tithes. It was clear that the 
tithe system was too costly a luxury even for so wealthy a 
kingdom as England. But they indulged in the luxury for 
some years, still losing large sums annually, and striving by 
fierce coercive enactments to break the popular spirit, and to 
mould the popular will. 

But the tithe agitation in Ireland had begun to rouse a 
tithe agitation in England as well. England had its Tithe ques- 



108 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

tion, too, and the action of the Irish people had awakened the 
English people to an appreciation of that fact ; and an agita- 
tion was at once set on foot against it. This brought the matter 
nearer home. In 1836 Lord John Eussell introduced a Tithe 
Bill that settled the question for England. Two years later, 
in 1888, he introduced a Bill that settled the question for Ire- 
land. The advances made to the tithe-owners were considered 
in the nature of a gift, and a quarter of a million of money 
was voted for the extinction of the remainder of the arrears. 
Such was, for the moment, the end of the great and pressing 
difficulty. 

Like most English measures passed for Ireland under the 
false and unnatural system of government which then existed 
and which still exists, it was only of a temporary nature, 
only a reform introductory of a far greater and more sweeping 
one which had to be accomplished in later years. Ever 
since the passing of the Act of Union the efforts of Irish 
politicians have been directed to extorting from unwilling 
Governments reforms which would have come naturally, 
simply, and far sooner, if the country had been left free to govern 
itself. The Tithe War struck a blow at the ascendency of the 
Established Church from which it never recovered. From the 
day when Lord John Eussell's Bill was passed- -nay more, from 
the day when the first Catholic priest denounced tithes from 
the pulpit, and the first Catholic farmer refused to pay his 
tribute — the fate of the Established Church was sealed. The 
long and bitter struggle, the years of agitation, the incessant 
debates in Parliament, and the many Ministerial attempts to 
arrive at some kind of compromise, by solving the difficulty 
after some fashion which should be most pleasing to Ascen- 
dency and least pleasing to the Irish people, all these, as they 
are now regarded after the lapse of more than a generation, 
may be seen to have been but the prelude to a greater agita- 
tion, and a greater reform, which had for its result the dis- 
establishment of the Protestant Church in Ireland. 



109 



CHAPTER IX. 

EEPEAL. 

The Government acted on its usual give-and-take principle 
in passing the Catholic Emancipation Act — that is to say, 
it gave with one hand and took away with the other. It 
had been forced by O'Connell, and the gigantic movement 
which O'Connell had created and fostered, to concede to its 
Catholic subjects the rights of which they had been so long 
and unjustly deprived. It endeavoured to obtain some small 
set-off" to the concession which was thus wrung from it. 

Between O'Connell's first and second election a change 
had been made in the composition of the electors. By an 
Act of Henry VIII. , which had been confirmed in 1795, 
freeholders to the value of forty shillings, over and above 
all charges, were entitled to vote, a system which naturally 
created a large number of small land-owners, who were 
expected to vote in obedience to the landlords who created 
them. O'Connell's election showed that the landlords would 
not always command the forty-shilling voters. It was clear 
that they might be won over to any popular movement, and 
it was decided to abolish them, which was accordingly done 
by an Act passed on the same day with the Catholic Emanci- 
pation Act. The new Act raised the county franchise to 10?. ; 
and freeholders of 10/., but under 201. , were subjected to a 
complicated system of registration, well calculated to bewilder 
the unhappy tenant, and render his chance of voting more 
difficult. But all these precautions did not prevent the return 
of O'Connell the second time he appealed to the electors of 
Clare, nor did it even prove of much service in hindering the 
tenants from voting with the leaders of the popular movements. 

The disfranchisement produced intense discontent through- 
out the whole country, and disorder followed close upon dis- 
content. O'Connell now began to remind Ireland of his pro- 



no IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

mise that Catholic Emancipation was a means towards an 
end — and that end, the Eepeal of the Union. He started a 
society called the ' Friends of Ireland,' which the Government 
at once put down. He started another, ' The Anti- Union 
Association.' It was put down, too, and O'Connell was 
arrested for sedition, tried, and found guilty. Judgment was 
deferred, and never pronounced, and O'Connell was released 
to carry on his agitation more vigorously than ever. 

With Ireland torn by disorders against which the Insur- 
rection Acts found it hard to cope, with the country aflame 
with anger at the extinction of the forty -shilling vote, the 
Government judged it wise and prudent to bring in a Bill for 
Ireland in January 1832, effecting still further disfranchise- 
ment. The new BiU abolished the forty- shilling vote in 
boroughs as well as in counties, and the lowest rate for 
boroughs and counties was lOZ. But for the next few years all 
recollection of Emancipation on the one hand, and Disfran- 
chisement on the other, was to be swallowed up in the struggle 
which has passed into history as the Irish Tithe War. What 
the Tithe War was, and how it ended, has been already told. 
While it was going on, during the long years in which it 
alternately blazed and smouldered, there was little time for 
Irish politicians to think of Eepeal. 

But O'Connell still kept the great purpose in his mind, 
still agitated, still planned, still schemed. It did not seem to 
him and to his followers that the difficulties in the way of 
Eepeal were in reality any greater than those which had 
menaced the movements in favour of Catholic Emancipation. 
The advocates of Catholic Emancipation had boldly faced all 
the obstacles that were brought against them, had overcome 
them all in turn, and Catholic Emancipation was now an 
accomplished fact. 

To O'Connell, and O'Connell's allies, it seemed as if the 
difficulties which were in the way of Eepeal might be as suc- 
cessfully struggled with, and as triumphantly overthrown. 
There was a great deal against the agitation. To begin with, 
the country was very poor. * Every class of the community, 



REPEAL 111 

says Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, ' was poorer than the corre- 
sponding class in any country in Europe.' The merchants, 
who had played a prominent part in political life since the 
Union, were now wearied and despairing of all agitation, and 
held aloof ; the Protestant gentry were, for the most part, 
devoted to the Union ; many of the Catholic gentry disliked 
O'Connell himself, and his rough, wild ways ; many of O'Con- 
nell's old associates in the Catholic Emancipation movement 
had withdrawn from him to join the Whigs. 

In England the most active dislike of O'Connell prevailed. 
The Pericles or the Socrates of Aristophanes, the Eoyalists 
drawn by Camille Desmoulins, were not grotesquer caricatures 
than the representation of O'Connell by English opinion and 
the English press. O'Connell himself was not so powerful 
with the people as he had been immediately after the triumph 
of the Emancipation struggle. He had paid the inevitable 
price of power in making many enemies. He used his power 
with an absolute indifference to appearances or public opinion, 
and that indifference made him many more enemies, who 
might well have been kept as friends, and alienated friends 
whose friendship was of value. The Catholic clergy, too, who 
had been his strongest allies in the Emancipation movement, 
were by no means to be counted on as supporters in the new 
Repeal movement. Many of them regarded the so-called 
settlement of the Tithe War, not as a victory, but as a pitiable 
compromise ; and they held O'Connell responsible for having 
yielded to the compromise and for sacrificing the interests of 
Ireland to the convenience of the Whigs. 

Under such conditions it must be admitted that the pros- 
pects of O'Connell's new movement were scarcely promising. 
But O'Connell was never a man to be frightened by stormy 
weather. He opened an Association on Burgh Quay, and he 
held meetings there regularly every week, at which he ad- 
dressed exceedingly small audiences with as much impassioned 
enthusiasm as though he were swaying by his eloquence the 
gigantic gatherings of the Clare election. At Burgh Quay 
he tauofht the doctrines of the Association. The Association 



112 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

proposed, first of all, to dissolve the Union ; but the dissolu- 
tion of the Union was not its only object. It further proposed 
to abolish tithes, to give fixity of tenure to land-holders, and 
it called for extension of the suffrage, for shorter Parliaments, 
for the abolition of the property qualification for members of 
Parliament, and for equal electoral districts. These latter 
points were taken from the great Chartist movement in Eng- 
land, to which O'Connell had given its name, and to which he 
had given such earnest support. 

The proud patience which the gods are said to love stood 
O'Connell in good stead now. For more than a year he 
laboured patiently at the hall on Burgh Quay, telling his 
scanty audiences again and again the shameful story of the 
Union, and appealing to all that was best and noblest in the 
national spirit to unite in breaking the hard bondage. But 
the audience did not increase. 'Conciliation Hall,' as O'Con- 
nell named his place of meeting on Burgh Quay, was sparsely 
filled witli audiences which did not readily take fire at his 
glowing periods and passionate appeals. But O'Connell 
never for a moment lost heart, or appeared dismayed. He 
went on as if he had the whole country with him. The 
movement gradually spread. The Kepeal agitation, Avhich 
had first languished, suddenly began to swell up and assume 
large proportions. 

O'Connell was always remarkable for the manner in which 
he contrived to utilise every national force for the great purposes 
to which he was devoted. While the Eepeal movement was 
going on, another movement of a different kind was started in 
Ireland, and met with remarkable success. A good, pure- 
hearted Franciscan friar began a great crusade against intem- 
perance, which proved strangely and unexpectedly successful, 
and which made the name of Father Mathew, the inaugurator 
of the temperance movement, very famous. O'Connell imme- 
diately saw what a strength such a movement would have if it 
were incorporated with his own movement, and he immediately 
gave all the support of his great authority and of his great 
name to the new crusade. He praised it enthusiastically: he 



REPEAL 113 

influenced many of his followers to join it, and he always spoke 
with the greatest pride of his noble army of teatotallers. 

Father Mathew himself was not an active politician. His 
duty in life was to wrestle with and to overthrow one of the 
greatest evils that can afflict humanity, and with the actual 
workings of political agitation he had little or no concern. 
His own personal opinions were, if anything, of a Conservative 
type, and he certainly had no kind of sympath}^ with any 
violent or demonstrative agitation of any sort. But he could 
not afford to decline the enormous assistance to the temper- 
ance movement which O'Conuell's support and O'Connell's 
encouragement gave. So it came about that the temperance 
movement became, as it weve, amalgamated with and absorbed 
into the Repeal movement, and Father Mathew's trimperance 
recruits swelled the ranks of the army that O'Connell was 
levying to wage war against the Union. No, not to wage war 
against the Union. Nothing was further from O'Connell's 
thoughts than any kind of active demonstration against op- 
pression. By peace, and peace only — by orderly, quiet, con^ ti- 
tutional measures — was the Repeal of the Union to be obtained. 
O'Connell liad a most cordial hatred of the revolutionaries of 
1798 and 1803, and he was destined a little later to express the 
bitterest animosity to the revolutionaries of the Young Ireland 
movement. 

' The year 1843,' said O'Connell, ' is, and shall be, the 
great Repeal year.' At the time when O'Connell uttered that 
prophecy, which was destined not to be fulfilled, it did indeed 
seem as if the Repeal of the Union was one of the contingen- 
cies — indeed one of the probabilities — of the immediate future. 
O'Connell had worked up his organisation and made it im- 
mensely powerful. Over in England he had established in 
the House of Commons an elaborate parliamentary system of 
his own. By his own influence he had secured seats in Par- 
liament for his sons and for a great many of his relatives, and 
for a large number of his followers and supporters. The 
Repeal party in the House of Commons was yearly growing 
stronger and more numerous. O'Connell's influence was 

I 



114 IB EL A KB SIXCE THE UNION 

almost all-powerful with the Irish constituencies ; and when- 
ever a vacancy occurred O'Connell sent down a Eepeal candi- 
date to contest the seat, and the Eepeal candidate was in 
most cases successfully returned. 

But what O'Connell chiefly relied on for effecting his 
puipose were the now historic moxister meetings. Nothing 
showed O'Connell's strength as much as these monster meet- 
higs. They were held usually on a Sunday, and they were 
attended by thousands of people who came to the place of 
meeting, not merely from the immediate vicinity, but often 
from other localities miles and miles away. The roads lead- 
ing to the fields or hall where the meeting was to take place 
would be choked for hours and hours previously, with the 
streams of people all making for a common centre. These 
vast meetings were addressed by O'Connell with the ever- 
ready eloquence which endeared him to the popular mind. 
His marvellous voice would carry to the farthest end of these 
great assemblies ; and the peasant on the farthest verge of 
the crowd was as much stirred and swayed by O'Connell's 
fiery moods of passion, patriotism, and humour, as those who 
stood by his side on the platform. 

O'Connell had another and most important ally in the 
Nation newspaper, which was destined, however, to turn 
against him in later years. But at the time of the monster 
meetings, the brilliant young men who wrote for the Nation 
were in complete accord with O'Connell, and gave him all the 
support of their varied gifts, genius, and eloquence. For a 
raan who had no intention of ever attempting to attain his 
ends by any other than the most strictly constitutional means, 
O'Connell's actions and utterances had sometimes a very 
curious appearance. The vast crowds who assembled to listen 
to O'Connell's eloquence began to attend the meetings in 
something like military order, and with a decided appearance 
of military discipline. They listened to language from O'Con- 
nell which certainly did not always sound like the language 
of peace. O'Connell addressed these vast bodies of men— at 
one meeting, held at Tara, a quarter of a million persons are 



REPEAL 115 

said to have been present — in terms of the bitterest denuncia- 
tion of England, and made the most glowing appeals to the 
most painful memories of Irish history. 

O'Connell had never any intention of making any attempt 
to repeal the Union by force ; but English statesmen, witness- 
ing these vast meetings, and reading the fiery words with 
which O'Connell addressed them, may well have thought that 
O'Connell was not prepared to keep his agitation strictly 
inside the limits of peace and order. There were others 
besides English statesmen who thought so, too. The young 
men who wrote for the Natio7i found it hard to believe that 
such great meetings were to be convened, and such inflamma- 
tory harangues to be delivered, if the whole thing were simply 
to be regarded as an imposing pageant, no more serious in its 
purpose, nor more dangerous to British rule in Ireland, than 
a Lord Mayor's show. 

The Government thought that O'Connell meant rebellion. 
Many of O'Connell's immediate followers and supporters 
thought, too, that he meant rebellion in the last instance, 
if nothing could be done without it. O'Connell, it is clear, 
never for a moment dreamt of rebellion ; but he was not un- 
willing to let the English Government see what forces he had 
at his command ; he was not even unwilling that they should 
imagine that if they were deaf to his demands he might answer 
by an armed rising. But he was so convinced that the 
Government would give way, that Eepeal would be conceded 
as Catholic Emancipation had been conceded, that he seems 
to have believed himself justified in making menaces which 
were meaningless, and in holding up to the English Govern- 
ment the symbols of danger, where no danger existed. 

O'Connell's plan was, of course, a failure. The Govern- 
ment did not grant Eepeal. They struck, instead, very sharply 
and decisively at O'Connell's movement. A great meeting 
was summoned by O'Connell, to be held at Clontarf, on Sun- 
day, October 8, 1843. The meeting was proclaimed by the 
Lord-Lieutenant on the very morning before it was announced 
to take place. For the moment it seemed as if a collision 

z2 



116 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

between authority and agitation was inevitable. Masses of 
people were coming into Clontarf from all directions at the 
very time ^^hen the proclamation was issued. The Govern- 
ment, it was clear, were determined to prevent the meeting, 
if necessary by force of arms ; and large bodies of police and 
soldiery were massed in readiness. It was said that the 
Government wished to provoke a collision ; and a collision 
would have meant much bloodshed, and consequences which 
it was impossible to foresee. But no collision took place- 
O'Connell immediately issued a proclamation of his own 
declaring that the orders of the Irish Executive must be 
obeyed ; that no meeting would be held ; and that the people 
were to return to their homes at once. The order was im- 
plicitly obeyed. The people, who would have resisted the 
authority of the Lord-Lieutenant, did not dream of resisting 
the voice of their leader. The meeting was not held, and the 
people went to their homes in peace. 

But with the dispersal of that meeting ended all the 
strength that the Eepeal movement had ; and ended too, prac- 
tically, O'Connell's power in Ireland. Once it was clear that, 
under no circumstances, he liad any intention of resorting to 
force, it was equally clear that his agitation oftered no serious 
danger to the English Government. The Government im- 
mediately prosecuted O'Connell, and put him in prison. 
O'Connell issued another proclamation to the people, calling 
upon them to remain perfectly quiet ; and the people again 
obeyed him. There was an appeal to the House of Lords, 
and the House of Lords gave the appeal in O'Connell's favour, 
and he was let out of prison. But he came out of prison 
practically a broken man. His agitation had failed hopelessly. 
All his young allies who had long believed in him were falling 
away from him, combining themselves into an alliance having 
far other objects than those dreamt of by O'Connell. 

Other causes, too, combined to tell against O'Connell. 
He was an old man now, and his old age was, it is said, 
tortured by a hopeless passion for a young girl whom he was 
eager to make his wife. It is melancholy to thmk of the great 



REPEAL 117 

Tribune, the leader of a nation, the man whose words were 
hstened to with reverence and almost with adoration by the 
vast body of his fellow-countrymen ; who had occupied a 
position almost unique in modern history, being vexed in his 
latest years, and in the time of his sorest trial, by the pangs 
of misprised love. O'Connell may have been the uncrowned 
king of Ireland ; the adored of his countrymen, and the dread 
of the English Government ; but he could not succeed in 
winning the affections of one young girl, or in shaking himself 
free from his unhappy passion. 

The last years of O'Connell's life are profoundly touching. 
The broken-down old man who had done so much for Ireland 
lingered for a few years after his imprisonment in fitful 
struggles with the Young Ireland Party, and in fitful appear- 
ances in the House of Commons, where the dying giant was 
listened to with a silent respect, which was in itself the most 
melancholy of homages. At last he resolved to go away to 
Italy. The one wish now left to him was to end his days in 
the sacred circle of the Eternal City ; but that wish, like so 
many others that he had so fondly cherished, was not destined 
to be gratified. He died at Genoa, on his way to Kome, on 
May 15, 1847. This long, stormy, brilliant career ended in 
the saddest of shadows. Failure is the most melancholy 
epitaph for a great man, and the end of O'Connell's life was, 
indeed, failure ; but he remains one of the greatest figures in 
Irish history. He has done great things for his country : 
what he failed to do he left as an inheritance to his country- 
men to be accomplished by his successors. 



CHAPTEE X. 

THE * NATION.' 

One autumn afternoon in 1842, three men were walking 
together in the Phoenix Park, in Dublin. They sat on a seat 
aud proceeded to discuss together a project which was destined 



118 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

to prove one of the most remarkable events in Irish history, 
and to leave a lasting impression upon the country. The 
three men Avere Thomas Davis, John Dillon, and Charles 
Gavan Duffy. The project they were discussing was the 
founding of a newspaper to represent properly the national 
feeling of Ireland, and to be the organ and the mouthpiece of 
the new ideas, hopes, and ambitions that were coming into 
being under the influence of O'ConnoIl's movement. The 
three young men were themselves sufficiently characteristic 
types of the party which was soon destined to be known as 
Young Ireland. All three were young ; all three w^ere gifted ; 
all three Avere profoundly imbued with the loftiest s|)irit of 
patriotism, and all three were convinced to their hearts' cores 
that the hour for the regeneration of their country was at 
hand. 

Physically there was not much resemblance between the 
men. Thomas Davis, then the best known of the three, and the 
man whom the only living member of that triple brotherhood 
would be the first to salute as the most remarkably gifted, 
was not remarkable in his personal appearance. He was 
described once by a brutal opponent, who at one time had 
promisings of a fair career, which came to a close disastrously 
a few years ago — the late Dr. Kenealy — as the * dog-faced 
demagogue.' He looked, it is said, more like a young English 
man than a young Irishman ; but he had what an Englisli 
poet has called ' the brave Irish eyes,' and they were lit by 
the fire of genius. 'Davis,' says Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, 
' was a man of middle stature, strongly but not coarsely built 
— a broad brow and a strong jaw stamped his face with a 
character of power ; but except when it was lighted by thought 
or feeling it was plain, and even rugged.' In his boyhood he 
was * shy, retiring, unready, and self-absorbed,' and was even 
described as ' a dull child ' by unappreciative kinsfolk. At 
Trinity College he was a wide and steady reader, who was 
chiefly noted by his fellow- students for his indifference to 
rhetorical display. He was auditor of the Dublin Historical 
Society, had made some name for himself by his contributions 



THE 'NATION' 119 

to a magazine called the Citizen, and was a member of the 
Repeal Association. 

John Dillon was a man of a very different appearance. 
Every Irishman or Englishman who knows his son, the present 
■lohn Dillon, knows how singularly impressive his appearance 
is. That dark, melancholy, handsome face, with its deep, 
Spanish eyes, its olive complexion, and the midnight darkness 
of its hair, might have smiled in stately gravity from one of 
tliose canvases of Velasquez which are the glory of Madrid. 
Yet those who knew the father assure a later generation that 
he was even handsomer than his son. * In person,' says Gavan 
Duffy, * he was tall and strikingly handsome, with eyes like 
a thoughtful woman's, and the clear, olive complexion and 
stately bearing of a Spanish noble.' He had been designed 
for the priesthood, but had decided to adopt the Bar. Like 
Davis, he loved intellectual pursuits, and was a man of wide 
and varied learning. * Under a stately and somewhat reserved 
demeanour lay latent the simplicity and joyfulness of a boy ; 
no one was readier to laugh with frank cordiality, or to give 
and take the pleasant banter which lends a relish to the 
friendship of young men.' Long years after, Tha :kei'ay said 
cf him to Gavan Duffy, that the modest and wholesome 
sweetness of John Dillon gave him a foremost place among 
the half-dozen men in the Unitv^d States whom he loved to 
remember. Dillon was at no time what we should call a very 
extreme politician. He never had much belief in the benefits 
to be gained by the warlike spirit which was so soon to 
animate Young Ireland ; and that fact should be borne in 
mind as one additional mark of honour in a career that was 
all honourable ; for when the end did come, and the die was 
cast, Dillon, without a moment's hesitation, flung himself 
into the struggle, prepared to stand or fall with the comrades 
whose actions he did not believe to be opportune or well 
advised. 

Of those three young men who walked in the Phoenix 
Park that day, and schemed out the starting of the Nation 
iiewspapcr, one is still alive among us, and has lived to 



120 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

be the brilliant and eloquent historian of the movement in 
which he took part, of the paper which he edited, and of 
the allies of his youth. Sir Charles Gavan Duffy and Kevin 
Izod O'Doherty are almost the last of the conspicuous Young 
Irelanders who now live and look upon the earth. At the 
time when he walked with Davis and Dillon in the Phoenix 
Park, Duffy was only twenty-six years of age ; Dil'on was a 
year older, and Davis was twenty-eight. The first number 
of the Nation was published on October 15, 1842. It took 
for its motto the words of an answer made by Stephen Woulfe 
to Peel's contemptuous inquiry in Parliament as to what 
good corporations would do a country so poor as Ireland. * I 
will tell the honourable gentleman,' said Woulfe ; ' they will 
go far to create and foster public opinion, and make it racy of 
the soil.' The motto of the Nation was to ' create and foster 
public opinion, and to make it racy of the soil.' It succeeded 
probably beyond the fondest expectations of its founders. 
The first number was sold out almost as soon as it was 
printed, and a copy of that first number to-day is one of the 
treasures of the It-ish bibliophile. 

The success of the Nation was extraordinary. Its political 
teachings, its inspiring and vigorous songs and ballads, the 
new lessons of courage and hope that it taught, the wide 
knowledge of history possessed by its writers — all combined 
to make it welcome to thousands. The tradesmen in towns, 
and the country peasants, read it, and were animated with the 
story of their old historic island into the belief that she had a 
future, and that the future was close at hand, and that they 
were to help to make it. It was denounced by the Tory press 
as the organ of a hidden ' FrencJ] party.' From France it- 
self came words of praise worth having from the Irish officers 
in the French service. One was Arthur O'Connor, the Arthur 
O'Connor of 1798 ; the other was Miles Byrne, who had fought 
at Wexford. 

O'Connell became alarmed at the growing popularity of 
the Nation. x\t first it had strongly suppoited him; he had 
even written a Eepeal Catechism in its pages ; 1 ut its young 



THE 'NATION' 121 

men had the courage to think for themselves, and to criticise 
even the deeds and the words of the Liberator. More and 
more young men clustered round the writers of the Nation , 
brilliant young essayists, politicians, poets. Gifted women 
wrote for the Nation, too — Lady Wilde, ' Speranza,' chief 
among them. The songs published in a volume called ' The 
Spirit of the Nation ' became immediately very popular. As 
the agitation grew, Peel's Government became more threaten- 
ing. O'Connell, in most of his defiant declarations, evidently 
thought that Peel did not dare to put down the organisation 
for Repeal, or he would never have challenged him as he did ; 
for O'Connell never really meant to resort to force at any 
time. 

But the few young men who wrote for the Nation, and 
the many young men who read the Nation, were really pre- 
pared to fight if need be for their liberties. Nor did they 
want foreign sympathy to encourage them. In the United 
States vast meetings, organised and directed by men like 
Seward and Horace Greeley, threatened England with * the 
assured loss of Canada by American arms ' if she suppressed 
the Repeal agitation by force ; and later Horace Greeley was 
one of a Directory in New York for sending officers and arms 
to Ireland. In France the Republican party were loud in 
their sympathy for the Irish, and Ledru Rollin had declared 
that France was ready to lend her strength to the support of 
an oppressed nation. No wonder the leaders of the national 
party were encouraged in the belief that their cause was 
pleasing to tlie Fates. 

The establishment of the Nation newspaper marked a new 
stage in the resurrection of Irish nationalism. With O'Con- 
nel's name the emancipation of a nation of Catholics from 
the Penal Laws will always be triumphantly associated ; and 
his name lends a lustre to the agitation in favour of the 
Repeal of the Union. But the warm breath of patriotism 
which in 1842 inspired the Irish nation with a new pur- 
pose and a new hope, and which with its afflatus has given 
a quicker vitality to every national movement since, is 



122 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

due, not to O'Connell, but to the young men wlio founded 
the Nation, who wrote for the Nation, and who made a 
nation. 

Critics — even friendly critics — are accustomed to say, too 
hghtly, that the Young Ireland movement failed in its object. 
If, because it did not add a successful revolution to the 
year of revolutions ; if, because it did not overthrow British 
rule in Ireland and set up the green flag on Dublin Castle, it 
deserves to be called a failure, then, of course, it did fail, for 
it accomplished none of these things. It was not a revolution ; 
it was hardly a rival rising. Its leaders were exiled almost 
without a struggle ; its flag never showed upon a single field. 
But it gave a new impulse to the Irish cause ; it gave the Irish 
new martyrs and a new tradition ; it carried to Irishmen in 
every corner of the earth a stronger hope and a firmer convic- 
tion of the duty of nationality. 

The Nation filled a great want in Ireland at the time that 
it appeared. The position of literature in the country was 
low indeed. The newspapers were few, and represented no 
national spirit. Literature was scantily cultivated in these 
newspapers ; and any knowledge of foreign literature and 
foreign politics was only to be obtained through the medium of 
the English Press. Books were few and dear. There was not 
at that time in existence any of those many cheap libraries which 
now make the masterpieces of Irish literature so easily acces- 
sible even to the poorest. Such literature as came readily in 
the way of the vast bulk of the Irish people was pitiful in the 
extreme, only stuff of the worst cheap-book style, or anti-national 
bombast, like the ' Battle of Aughrim.' Irish history was no- 
where taught. English hist jry alone was recognised in the 
schools. It is probable that he national spirit has seldom been 
at so low an ebb as when tl Nation first came out. The 
Nation promptly remedied i^h. .^ate of things. In its columns 
week after week the Irish n ople began to be made acquainted 
with glowing articles on own history, with thrilling ballads 

devoted to the deeds and ^ the memory of Irish heroes, with 
animated appeals to the shmen of the present to be worthy 



THE 'X ATI ON' 123 

of the Irishmen of that past which was now ahiiost for the 
first time revealed to them. 

The young men who wrote for the Nation were well 
qualified to make their organ powerful and impressive. It 
would have been difficult to find anywhere a more brilliant or 
more gifted company. Thomas Davis was the leader and 
master of them all. The most genuine poet Ireland had seen 
since Thomas Moore, he was inspired by a far more national 
spirit than Moore's, and the songs of Davis were adored by 
Young Ireland. None of the Young Irelanders adored Davis 
more than did John Pigot, the dark-haired, dark-eyed boy, 
whose winning sweetness and chivalrous bearing made him, 
according to Duffy, ' the woman's ideal of a patriot,' and also 
made him, not unnaturally, the appropriate hero for the novel 
of a satirical novelist who took Young Ireland for his theme. 
His closest friend was John O'Hagan, whom Davis declared 
to have been * the safest in council, the most moderate in 
opinion, the most considerate in temper, of the young men.' 
His moderation of opinion did not prevent him, however, from 
writing some of the most impassioned aiiti-English poems that 
appeared in the Nation ; but it preserved him from the later 
schemes of Young Ireland to take service years after under 
the English Government, and to translate * The Song of 
Roland.' 

Amongst the other men who wrote for the Nation in its 
early days, some of the most conspicuous were Denis Florence 
MacCarthy, MacNevin, and Clarence Mangan. Of these 
three, Clarence Mangan was blest with the most brilliant and 
the most unhappy genius. With a lyric power and fanciful 
imagination which have only t^een rivalled by Edgar Allan 
Poe, he was cursed by a fate as ;t melancholy as that which 
pursued the author of ' The oKven.' To each, too — the 
Irishman and the American-i.ifeigUtbe applied those lines of 
Poe's masterpiece, which speak o;t9Spme 

Unhappy mas . ^ 
Whom unmerciful disr ' ix 
Followed fast and folic i^. faster. 



124 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Gavan Duffy gives a picture of liim wliicli reads like the frag- 
ment from one of the weird stories of Hoffmann — some de- 
scription, it might be, of the student Ansehnus in the en- 
chantmg * Golden Jar ' — ' He lived a secluded, unwholesome 
life, and when he emerged into daylight he was dressed in a 
blue cloak, midsummer or midwinter, and a hat of fantastic 
shape, under which golden hair as fine and silky as a woman's 
hung in unkempt tangles, and deep blue eyes lighted a face as 
colourless as parchment. He looked like the spectre of some 
German romance rather than a living creature.' 

Mangan's career ended like that of Edgar Allan Poe, and 
of another brilliant man of genius, Henri Murgen, in the 
hospital. A fatal and unfortunate taste gradually sapped and 
shattered his fine intellect and fantastic genius ; but he has left 
behind him an imperishable monument in the songs which 
bear his name. It was one of Mangan's quaint humours to 
assume himself to be an Oriental scholar ; and among his 
verses are many pieces claiming to be taken from the Turkish, 
the Arabic, or Persian. As a matter of fact, it seems that 
Maiigan had no acquaintance whatever with the strange lan- 
guages of the East. But he had what was far better — a mind 
that was perfectly able to appreciate the Oriental spirit, and 
his Eastern poems have in them that power of making the 
reader appreciate the gorgeous colouring of fancy and splen- 
dour of the East, which is worth the most intimate acquaint- 
ance with the lexicons of Kichardson and Redhouse. The 
poem, which is called * The Time of the Barmecides,' I have, 
for my own part, no hesitation in pronouncing to be one of 
the most stirring and beautiful ballads of our time ; and the 
melancholy, dirge-like music of ' Karaman,' and the poem on 
the Bosphorus, with all its marvellous ingenuity of rhyming 
power, are two other proofs of the way in which Mangan 
was imbued, or appeared to be imbued, with the Oriental 
spirit. He might not read a line of Persian, but he was a poet 
worthy to have set up his tent in the company of Hafiz, near 
the pleasant waters of Rocknabad, and under the groves of 
Mosella. 



TIJE 'NATION' 125 

Denis Florence MacCartliy long outlived his poetic col- 
leagues of the Nation, but he, too, has now passed away, after 
enriching Irish literature with many beautiful poems and 
some admirable translations. The prose of MacNevin and 
the poetry of Williams are as familiar to-day to Irishmen as 
they were in the years when the Nation first became famous. 

Seldom in the history of any nation has a more remarkable 
body of young men been banded together. Like O'Connell, 
they have experienced that curious Conservative canon- 
isation Avhich is represented by the exaltation and laudation 
of any body of Irishmen who are passed away, at the ex- 
pense of any body of living Irishmen who are working 
heart and soul for the cause of the country. The Young 
Irelanders, who were the abomination of all Toryism at the 
time when they were trying to educate their countrymen, 
have suddenly become something like heroes in the eyes of 
Conservatism. They are held up to the men of to-day as 
honourable models, as a glaring and conspicuous contrast. 
The men of to-day are told that if they were as the Young 
Irelanders, they would be regarded with very different eyes, 
and so on. All of which is of no concern to Irish or English 
Liberalism, and can in nowise injure the memories of the 
young men who founded the Nation. 



CHAPTER XI. 

YOUNG IRELAND. 

While O'Connell was still the recognised head of the Irish 
national movement, a young man came forward as a promi- 
nent figure in Irish politics, Mr. William Smith O'Brien, 
member of Parliament for Limerick County. He was a country 
gentleman, of stately descent, a direct descendant of Brian 
Boroimhe, a brother of Lord Inchiquin. He was a high- 
minded and hunourable gentleman, with his country's cause 
deeply at heart. Davis described him as ' the most extrava- 



126 IRELAND SINCE TEE UNION 

gant admirer of the Nation I have ever met.' Smith O'Brien 
made his first appearance in Conciliation Hall on Jmie 2, 
1844, and for some time he was a constant attendant at its 
meetings. His views, however, were by no means entirely 
in accordance with those of O'Connell's. O'Counell was em- 
phatically and definitely opposed to any appeal at any time 
or mider any consideration to physical force. Smith O'Brien 
was of opinion that, under certain circumstances, it was the 
duty of the nation to defend its rights in arms. 

O'Connell at first welcomed O'Brien cordially. ' I find it 
impossible,' he said, ' to give a proper expression to the feel- 
ings of delight I have in hailing Mr. William Smith O'Brien 
to the ranks of the Association. He now is in his true 
position — the position which was occupied centuries ago by 
his ancestor, Brian Boroimlie. Whatever may become of me, 
it is a consolation and a pleasure to remember that Ireland 
will have a true friend in William Smith O'Brien— a man who 
has a well cultivated mind, with intellectual endowments of 
the very highest order, powerful eloquence, untiring energy, 
constant love for his country, and every other true qualifica- 
tion of a popular leader ; and I delight to hail him to his right 
place among his friends, at the post at which every true 
Irishman would wish to see him — at the head of the Irisl.' 
people.' 

But the alliance between O'Connell and O'Brien, between 
Old Ireland and Young Ireland, could not be, and was not, 
of long duration. The great majority of the Young Irelanders 
entertained a scarcely concealed contempt for the policy of 
O'Connell's old age. The great majority of the Young 
Irelanders talked, read, and thought revolution. In passionate 
poems and eloquent speeches they expressed their hatred of 
tyranny and their stern resolve to free their country by brave 
deeds ratker than by arguments. They had now a brilliant 
orator amoi g them, Thomas Francis Meagher, ' a young man,' 
says Mr. Le ky, * whose eloquence was beyond comparison 
superior to that of any other rising speaker in the country, 
and who, had he been placed in circumstances favourable to 



YOUNO IRELAND 127 

the development of his talent, might, perhaps, at length have 
taken his place among the great orators of Ireland.' 

Meagher had early endeared himself to the impetuous and 
gifted young men with whom he was allied, by a brilliant 
speech against O'Connell's doctrine of passive resistance. 
This speech of Meagher's, like all Meagher's speeches, is — or, 
at least, ought to be — familiar to every Irish nationalist ; but 
its rare beauty and eloquence not merely justify, but prescribe 
its quotation here again. ' I am not one of those tame moral- 
ists,' the young man exclaimed, * who say that liberty is not 
worth one drop of blood. . . . Against this miserable maxim 
the noble virtue that has saved and sanctified humanity 
appears in judgment. From the blue waters of the Bay of 
Salamis ; from the valley over which the sun stood still and 
lit the Israelites to victory ; from the cathedral in which the 
sword of Poland has been sheathed in the shroud of Kosciusko ; 
from the Convent of St. Isidore, where the fiery hand that 
rent the standard of St. George upon the plains of Ulster has 
mouldered into dust ; from the sands of the desert, where the 
wild genius of the Algerine so long has scared the eagle of the 
Pyrenees ; from the ducal palace in this kingdom where the 
memory of the gallant and seditious Geraldine enhances more 
than royal favour the splendour of his race ; from the solitary 
grave within this mute city, which a dying bequest has left 
without an epitaph — oh ! from every spot where heroism has 
had a sacrifice or a triumph, a voice breaks in upon the cring- 
ing crowd that cherishes this maxim, crying, '* Away with it ! 
— away with it ! " ' 

There are few passages in the ornate oratory of the world, 
in the glowing prose of some of the earlier Greek orators or 
in the stately magnificence of Cicero, in the richly-coloured 
periods of Burke, or in the shining sentences of Mirabeau or 
Vergniaud, which can be unhesitatingly declared superior to 
the brilliant utterances of the young Waterford gentleman of 
three-and-twenty. There is reason to believe, and to regret in 
believing, that Meagher's speeches are not studied in Ireland 
to-day with the attention and with the devotion which they 



128 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

deserve. Some few months ago a student made repeated 
and unsuccessful attempts, in Dublin, to obtain a copy of 
Meagher's speeches ; but he searched in vain the bookshops of 
the quays, and searched in vain in the bookshops elsewhere, 
for a copy of the speeches of one of the greatest orators 
and truest patriots that Ireland has yet produced. He could 
not come across an example of the Lives and Speeches pub- 
lished in Ireland in the days when the memory of Young 
Ireland was the memory of yesterday, he could not obtain an 
example of the American edition of 1853. The shilling 
volume published by Cameron & Ferguson, which gives the life 
of Meagher, with selections from his speeches and writings, 
confines these selections almost entirely to his American 
speeches, which, how^ever valuable in themselves, are not the 
speeches that made his name famous. 

Luckily, many of his best speeches are preserved in the 
admii'able series of Penny Readings which are issued from 
the Nation office. But it is hard to avoid feeling deep 
regret that it should not be possible for any patriotic Irishman 
to become at any time the possessor of the speeches of one 
of the most gifted of his countrymen. Speeches such as the 
one which has been quoted were not calculated to cement 
the alliance between Old and Young Ireland. Another speech 
of Meagher's was the direct cause of severing the alliance. 
In a speech at Conciliation Hall Meagher declared that ' the 
King of Heaven — the Lord of Hosts ! the God of Battles ! — - 
bestows His benediction upon those who unsheath the sword 
in the hour of a nation's ]3eril. From that evening on which, 
in the valley of Bethulia, He nerved the arm of the Jewish 
girl to smite the drunken tyrant in his tent, down to this our 
day, in which He has blessed the insurgent cavalry of the 
Belgian priest. His Almighty hand has ever been stretched 
forth from His throne of light to consecrate the flag of freedom 
— to bless the patriot's sword.' The speech was interrupted 
by John O'Connell, Daniel O'Cdnnell's son. Smith O'Brien 
rose to defend Meagher. The quarrel was complete ; the 
severance inevitable. 



YOUNG IRELAND 129 

The Young Irelanders seceded from O'Connell. A second 
secession was yet to be made from the ranks of the Young 
Irelanders themselves. One of the most prominent men in 
tlie movement was John Mitchel, the son of an Ulster Uni- 
tarian minister. Thomas Davis, the sweet chief singer of 
the movement, died suddenly before tbe movement which he 
had done so much for had taken up revolution in any shape. 
Mitchel came on the Nation in his place, and advocated revo- 
lution and republicanism. He followed the traditions of 
Emmet and the men of ninety-eight ; he was in favour of 
independence. His doctrines attracted the more ardent of 
the Young Irelanders, and what was known as a war party 
was formed. 

There were now three sections of Irish agitators. There 
were the Tepealers, who were opposed to all physical force ; 
there were the moderate Young Irelanders, only recognising 
physical force when all else had failed in the last instance ; 
and there was now this new party, who saw in revolution the 
only remedy for Ireland. Smith O'Brien was bitterly opposed 
to Mitchel's doctrines. Mitchel withdrew from the Nation 
and siarted a paper of his own, the United Irishman, in 
which he advocated them more fiercely than ever. Mitchel 
was a powerful writer. He had, perhaps, the strongest mind 
of all the men oi his time. He almost alone, perhaps, saw 
clearly his way before him. He devoted himself and his 
paper to preaching ' the holy hatred of foreign dominion.' 
' To educate,' he said, ' that holy hatred ; to make it know 
itself, and avow itself, and at last fill itself full, I hereby 
devote the columns of the United Irishman.'' His vehement 
genius overshadowed the name of a man to whom he owed 
much, Fintan Lalor. 

The Young Irelanders and the Mitchelites were at least 
agreed in recognising revolution. Some regarded it as a pos- 
sibility ; more held it to be inevitable ; all openly advocated 
it. Unfortunately for the success of the movement, most of 
the time and genius of the party was spent in advocating revo- 
lution; little or no time was devoted to preparation for it. The 

K 



IBO IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

year 1848, the year of unfulfilled revolutions, when crowns 
were falling and kings flying about in all directions, might well 
have seemed a year of happy omen for a new Irish rebellion. But 
the Young Irelanders were not ready for rebellion when their 
plans were made known to Government ; and the Government 
struck at them before they could do anything. Mitchel was 
arrested, tried, and transported to Bermuda. That was the 
turning-point of the revolution. The Mitchelites wished to 
rise in rescue. They urged, and rightly urged, that if 
revolution was meant at all, then was the time. But the 
less extreme men held back. An autumnal rising had been 
decided upon, and they were unwilling to anticipate the 
struggle. They carried their point. 

Mitchel was sentenced to fourteen years' transportation. 
When the verdict was delivered he declared that, like the 
Eoman Sc^vola, he could promise hundreds who would follow 
his example, and as he spoke he pointed to Meagher, John 
Martin, and others of the associates who were thronging the 
galleries of the court. A wild cry came up from all his friends, 
' Promise for me, Mitchel — promise for me ! ' With that cry 
ringing in his ears, he was hurried from the court, heavily 
ironed and encircled by a little army of dragoons, to the war- 
sloop * Shearwater,' that had been waiting for the verdict and 
the man. As the war-sloop steamed out of Dublin Harbour, 
the hopes of the Young Irelanders went with her, vain and 
evanescent, from that hour forth, as the smoke that floated 
in the steamer's wake. There is a pathetic little story which 
records Mitchel's looking out of the prison-van that drove him 
from the court, and seeing a great crowd, and asking where 
they were going, and being told that they were going to a 
flower show. There were plenty of men in the movement 
who would have gladly risked everything to try and rescue 
Mitchel. But nothing could have been done without unan- 
imity, and the too great caution of the leaders prevented the 
effort at the moment when it could have had the faintest hope 
of success. 

From that moment the movement was doomed. Men who 



YOUNG IRELAND 131 

had gone into the revohition heart and soul might have said 
of Smith 0'r>iien as Menas, in ' Antony and Cleopatra,' says 
to Pompey : 'For this I'll never follow thy pall'd forlanes 
more. Who seeks and will not take when once 'tis offered, 
shall never find it more.' The supreme moment of danger 
thus passed over, the Government lost no time in crushing 
out all that was left of the insurrection. Smith O'Brien, 
Meagher, and Dillon went down into the country, and tried 
to raise an armed rebellion. There was a small scuffle with 
the police at Ballingarry, in Tipperary ; the rebels were dis- 
persed, and the rebellion was over. 

Smith O'Brien, Meagher, and others were arrested, and 
condemned to death. Meagher's speech from the dock was 
worthy of his rhetorical genius : ' I am not here to crave with 
faltering lip the life I have consecrated to the independence 
of my country. ... I offer to my country, as some proof of 
the* sincerity with which I have thought and spoken and 
struggled for her, the life of a young heart. . . , The history 
of Ireland explains my crime, and justifies it. . . . Even here, 
where the shadows of death surround me, and from which I 
see my early grave opening for me in no consecrated soil, the 
hope which beckoned me forth on that perilous sea, whereon 
I have been wrecked, animates, consoles, enraptures me. No, 
I do not daspair of my poor old country, her peace, her liberty, 
her glory ! ' 

The death-sentence was commuted to transportation for 
life, and, in a little while, John Martin, Thomas Francis 
Meagher, Smith O'Brien, Kevin Izod O'Dohertyand Terence 
Bellew M'Manus found themselves in Van Diemen's Land with 
John Mitchel. In 1853 a scheme was organised by the Irish- 
men in America to effect the release of the political prisoners, 
and the attempt was entrusted to Mr. P. J. Smyth. Mr. P. J. 
Smyth was, at that time, an earnest and active Nationalist, 
inspired by a passionate admiration for the greater abilities of 
his colleagues in Young Ireland. It was so much to his credit 
that he attempted and succeeded in effecting the rescue of his 
imprisoned brethren, that it must be a matter of regret to every 



132 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Irish Nationalist that his career did not end on the day after 
he had accompHshed his purpose. His later life is only 
melancholy. He never outgrew the traditions of his youth. 
He lived and breathed in the air of 1848 at a time when the 
principles of 1848 were further removed from the immediate 
needs of the national cause than the old Brehon laws. He 
hated the young men because they were not content to be 
limited in the circle of an earlier generation, and he died a 
placeman. 

The rescue of Mitchel was the first effected. The ques- 
tion of Mitchel's conduct in making his escape under the 
conditions in which it was made has often been debated. It 
is certain that he effected his escape while he was a prisoner 
on parole. The terms of parole would certainly imply that 
the prisoner who intends to effect his escape should put him- 
self in the same position as he was in before the parole was 
granted to him. This undoubtedly Mitchel did not do. 

It may be urged, it has been urged, that it is not necessary 
to keep faith with a hostile Government. To such an argu- 
ment it is impossible to agree. It is the duty of a patriot to 
keep his faith and his word unsullied, and to make his rule 
of life an example to his country and the world. Undoubtedly, 
no leniency of parole would have been shown to the Irish 
political prisoners if it had become an understood thing that 
the parole so granted was to be made use of to facilitate the 
prisoners' escape. However, Mitchel, who was certainly an 
honourable man, believed himself justified in making his 
escape ; and the method of his escape was approved of by 
Smith O'Brien, who, however, did not avail himself of the 
same means of effecting his release, as he knew that by so 
doing he would prevent his returning to Ireland. 

Meagher and some of the other exiles succeeded in getting 
away later on, and most of them followed Mitchel to America. 
In the great American civil war, Mitchel and Meagher were 
found on opposite sides. Mitchel became a tremendous advo- 
cate of the South ; and two of his sons fell in battle in the 
Confederate uniform. Meagher fought bravely at the head 



YOUNG IIIKLISD 138 

of his historic Irish Brigade. His end was a curiously and 
grimly inappropriate conclusion to that brilliant and varied 
career. He fell one night from the deck of a steamer, and 
the dark waters of the Missouri stifled one of the bravest and 
purest spirits that have ever been devoted to the cause of Irish 
independence. 

Smith O'Brien received his pardon in the course of time, 
and he died in Wales in 1864. Mitchel came back to Ireland 
years and years after, and was put forward for Parliament and 
elected. The House of Commons refused to recognise the 
right of the Irish patriot, whom English law condemned a 
felon, to sit in the House of Commons. A new writ was 
issued ; Mitchel's name was brought forward again, and he 
would undoubtedly have been re-elected, but in the midst of all 
the excitement and turmoil the grim Sergeant Death came 
and ended Mitchel's troubled life. He was followed to the 
grave soon after by his friend, John Martin, who had long 
occupied a seat in the British Parliament. 

Most of the other Young Ireland leaders and exiles died 
abroad. Kevin Izod O'Doherty is still alive ; he sat as a 
Nationalist member in the Parliament of 1885-1886. Gavan 
Duffy was tried three times, but could not be convicted. He 
afterwards sat some time in Parliament, and then went into 
voluntary exile, to find title and fortune in Victoria. 



CHAPTEE XII. 

YOUNGEST IRELAND. 

* Youngest Ireland ' might well be the title of a little known 
chapter in Irish history — the story of an episode which had 
one city for its theatre, and which had its fellows and its rivals 
in other parts of Ireland. One day, in the summer of 1848, 
a group of young men waited about the post-house in Cork for 
the arrival of the coach which was to bring the news from 
Dublin. At that time the railway did not run aU the way 



134 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

from Dublin to Cork. It broke off, if we remember rightly, 
at Tipperar}' , and from that point the mail and the passengers 
were conveyed by public coach. Presently the coach came in, 
and was surrounded by the w^aiting group, eager for news. 
One amongst them was especially eager. He hurriedly ques- 
tioned as to all that had happened in the Viceregal city within 
the last few days, and he was told that John Mitchel had been 
tried, sentenced, and transported. 

' Was there no attempt at rescue ? ' asked the young Cork- 
man, impulsively. ' No,' was the answer, ' none whatever.' 
The young Corkman shrugged his shoulders. * Bravo, my 
country ! you will be a nation by-and-by,' he said, and so 
walked off. And from that hour he could never be induced 
to play any part or evince the slightest interest in Irish poli- 
tics. To his mind, the fact that John Mitchel was allowed to 
go into exile without a hand being lifted to save him, was in 
itself sufficient proof of the hopelessness of the national cause. 
Happily for Ireland, this pessimistic mocd was not generally 
shared. There were young men in that city by the Lee who 
did not think that even because the men of forty-eight had made 
no attempt to rescue John Mitchel from his sentence, that 
therefore the fires of patriotism were necessarily extinguished 
upon the altars of liberty. Forty-eight had failed ; but there 
was no reason why forty-nine should fail. 

In this very year, when the Queen was in Dublin listening 
to the fervid protests of loyal citizens, and while she was 
being assured by Ascendency that the Young Ireland move- 
ment meant nothing, and that Ireland was heart and soul 
devoted to Ascendency and its works, in that year a young 
man came down on a special visit from Dublin to Cork. The 
young man bore a name which is deservedly dear to Irishmen 
— Joseph Brenan, better known to his friends and better 
known to us to-day as Joe Brenan. Those who knew Joe 
Brenan are not likely to forget his wonderful dark eyes, his 
brilliant talk, and, what was better than either, one of the 
most national hearts that ever beat for Ireland. Joe Brenan 
was a young Corkman who had gone to Dubhn and became 



YOUNGEST IRELAND 135 

a writer on Mitcliel's paper, and who, when Mitchel was 
exiled, had started a paper of his own. He came down to 
Cork with the deUberate purpose of trying if he could not 
do something to stir into blaze again the revolutionary fires 
v.'liich seemed to have been extinguished when Meagher, and 
O'Doherty, and Smith O'Brien, and the others were sentenced 
to transportation. 

Brenan was a man of many and varied gifts. If he was 
a brilliant talker, he was also a brilliant writer in prose and 
in verse. There is one of his early compositions, well remem- 
bered by all those who knew him, written on his eighteenth 
birthday, in which the young Irishman expresses his bitter 
regret that he has as yet accomplished nothing that is likely 
to make his name immortal : 

Eighteen ! why Chatterton was mighty then, 
And Keats had glimpses into fairyland ! 

And the young poet was almost inclined to regard himself as 
utterly worthless because he, too, was eighteen, and was not 
mighty, and had had no glimpses into fairyland which the 
world at large cared anything about. He had, however, no 
reason to complain. His youth was destined to be better 
spent than in peering into fairyland, or in writing verses like 
those of Piowley. He was inspirited by an unconquerable 
devotion to his country ; by an unswerving ambition to serve 
her ; and he did serve her, not ineffectively. One of the most 
romantic passages in his romantic life is that he was loved by 
a gentle poetess who is dear to all Irishmen as ' Mary of 
the Nation.' 

Brenan came down to Cork, and entered into negotiations 
with two men, both young men, and about his own age. One 
of them is a member of the present Irish parliamentary party, 
and his name is not altogether unknown in literature. The 
other is now the editor of the most influential paper in the 
South of Ireland. There was, at this time, a kind of eating- 
house at Cork, in a street off Patrick Street, kept by a Mrs, 
Heron, which was an establishment distinguished for its sanded 



136 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

floors, the simplicity of its appointments, and for the excel- 
lence of its cookery. It was a great place for suppers cf a 
simple kind, and it was very popular with the young men of 
Cork. At Mrs. Heron's Joe Brenan and his two friends 
often met in conclave. Joe Brenan's plan was simple and 
not unpractical ; and, of course, his purpose was revolutionary. 
He had no great hope of a successful revolution. His idea 
was that a number of small risings should take place on the 
very same day, hour, and minute, in different parts of Ireland ; 
that their suddenness and unanimity might serve to distract 
authority ; that at least there would be a struggle ; that 
some brave men would die for Ireland ; and that something 
good for the country must happen out of that. 

' Who knows but the world may end to-night ? ' says the 
lover in Browning's poem. Something of the same desperate 
mood seemed to possess Joe Brenan's men at that time. 
Let it at least be shown to Ascendency that there were 
young men in Ireland ready to die for their country, and 

then ? Well, the world might end; or Ascendency 

might grow humane ; or any other strange and exceedingly 
milikely thing might come to pass. It was the dream of a 
young man ; and Joe Brenan was a young man, and his 
friends were all young men — many of them very young men. 
For the little group of three had soon increased, had spread 
in many directions, and had drawn into its charmed orbit 
many allies and comrades, and was widening and extending 
like the circles of a pool where a stone has fallen. 

Soon m Cork alone there were a very large number of 
generous, high-souled, pure-hearted young men, whose one 
dream, hope, and ambition was to give their lives for the sake 
of their comitry. To do them justice, their scheme was not 
unpractical, and was by no means without sense or hope. 
They had plenty of arms, to begin with. There were few 
young men in Cork in 1848 who could not boast the posses- 
sion of a rifle, or a sabre, or a pike ; and when '48 failed, 
these rifles, and sabres, and pikes were hidden away in all 
sorts of unlikely places — buried in back gardens, or stored 



YOUNG EST IRELAND 187 

away in unsuspicious-looking barrels, or put out of sight, if 
not out of mind, somehow. 

The young men who gathered about Joe Brenan, and 
who looked up to him as the prophet of a new creed of revo- 
lution, could all, at' any moment, have laid their hands upon 
a weapon of some kind or another. Then, too, it must be 
remembered that their desire was not very difficult to gratify. 
They did not hope of themselves to win the freedom of Ireland. 
They only hoped to make a series of desperate efforts, to die 
if needs were, gallantly, and by their deaths to stimulate the 
national feeling of their country, and to convince the oppressor 
of their earnestness of purpose, and of their hatred of his rule. 
They set to work with all seriousness of purpose, and with a 
right good- will. It was the duty of every one of Joe Brenan's 
friends to swear in as many recruits as he could, and to get 
these recruits to bring in others to swell the total of insurrec- 
tion. There were incessant nightly drillings in out-of-the-way 
places. There were incessant meetings of the revolutionary 
leaders and of their followers, organised under the pretence of 
temperance meetings, literary associations and the like. One 
spot in especial was a favourite place for secret drillings — the 
place known as CorkPark,inthe region where the Cork and Ban- 
don Railway now is, then slob land. Here there were continual 
drillings, where the great object was to get large bodies of 
men to obey readily the word of command, and to go through 
military evolutions swiftly and silently. Here, too, was a great 
advantage, that if at any time unwelcome persons — police or 
others — did make their appearance, any body of men could 
immediately and easily disperse, and be lost to sight in a few 
moments. 

Many men were active in the movement whose names are 
still remembered in * rebel Cork.' There was a smith named 
Bowes, a very Hercules in a leather apron, whose forge was a 
special centre of disaffection. There was a cobbler of the 
name of Mountain, a name grimly appropriate for the member 
of a party which desired to be regarded as the * mountain ' of 
Irish rebeUion, who played a conspicuous part in the organi- 



138 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

sation, and who afterwards, if we remember rightly, underwent 
his trial for treason-felony. Another man who took a promi- 
nent place in the movement was Phil Gray, ostensibly a pedlar 
by profession, who was of rare service .in conveying mes- 
sages from one part of the country to another. At the smith's 
forge, in the cobbler's shop, in Mrs. Heron's supper-rooms, at 
the private dwellings of the youthful rebels, in all sorts of 
places in the city, the followers of Joe Brenan — who might 
almost have called themselves Youngest Ireland — met together 
and planned, and schemed, and hoped. They had their pass- 
w^ords, of course— their signs and counter-signs. If one 
recruit met another, and wished to be certain of his comrade- 
ship and brotherhood, he began by asking him, ' ^yiiat's the 
news ? ' If the other were one of the League, he immediately 
made answer, ' The harvest is coming ! ' If this answer were 
not quite sufficient — if it seemed an answer that might possibly 
have been made by chance by some uninitiated one, for the 
harvest teas near — he spoke again, interrogating thus : 
' How are we to reap it ? ' If the man thus interrogated 
answered, ' We'll reap it with steel,' he was at once recog- 
nised as being of the company of the chosen. 

What Joe Brenan was doing in Cork, others were en- 
gaged upon elsewhere. Youngest Ireland was busy in many 
parts of Ireland. Undoubtedly, however, the task that these 
young men had undertaken was attempted under conditions 
of more than usual difficulty. The failure of the forty-eight 
movement, the imprisonment and exile of its leaders— these 
in themselves were sufficient to dishearten a people reduced 
by famine to the verge of despair. The Young Ireland move- 
ment cannot be said to have taken hold of the popular mind. 
The people, upon whom in the end the success of a rising 
must depend, were not as a body prepared for, or even expect- 
ing, a rising at all. We are told, for example, that when 
Smith O'Brien, having at last resolved upon revolution, came 
in the course of his crusade to a certain village, the people 
there came out to meet him with chairs and tables, and set 
about the erection of a sort of platform, under the impression 



YOUNGEST IRELAND 139 

that he was merely going to hold a public meeting. We are 
told, too, that at the time when Mitchel was preaching the 
fiercest principles of insurrection, and was leaving behind him 
even the most vehement politicians of the Nation — even at 
this time the large bulk of the Irish peasantry, to whom the 
rising was most likely to appeal, knew as little of Mitchel as 
they did of Mahomet. 

If there were such difficulties in the way of the Young 
Ireland movement, these difficulties stood ten, aye, a hun- 
dredfold greater in the way of the movement which succeeded to 
it. The young men who organised it, who took hand in it, 
who enrolled themselves proudly in its ranks, were patriotic, 
pure men. Gallant and devoted, they were prepared to do all 
that men could do for the cause that lay dearest to their 
hearts. But if the materials for a successful revolution might 
perhaps have been found in the Ireland of forty- eight, these 
materials were not to be found in the Ireland of the succeeding 
year. AVhen one rising has failed, it is very difficult to rouse 
popular emotion or popular passions to the fever-heat of 
another insurrection. 

Still, with all these difficulties in the way, the young men 
of the new movement were determined to go on. Anything, 
they thought, was better than a torpid acquiescence in defeat. 
So they met, and plotted, and planned, and drilled, and 
armed, and made ready for the signal which was to come to 
them, and which was to be the match which would fire the 
flames of rebellion in many parts of the country at the same 
moment. Unfortunately, the signal was not properly given. 
It reached some places and not others. The insurrection did 
not break out simultaneously. There were one or two abor- 
tive risings in different parts of the country. Joe Brenan 
did his part of the business. He rose at Cappoquin. He led 
his little body of insurgents to take the police barrack there. 
The police were prepared for their coming. There was a 
sharp, short exchange of shots, and then Joe Brenan saw 
that the thing was hopeless. His men dispersed. He him- 
self flung away his revolver, and walked quietly from the 



HO IB ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

scene of action and got into hiding, later on making good his 
escape to America. 

That was the end of insurrection for a time. The Httle 
centres of conspiracy that had been waiting for the watchword 
that was to hurl them into action heard with despair of the 
disaster at Cappoquin and the failure of their hopes. There 
was nothing further to be done for the moment. For a time 
the national cause was defeated ; for a time the foreign 
dominion was triumphant. Many of those who had been 
leaders and soldiers in this movement were destined to take 
part in first one and then another secret agitation, having an 
armed rising for its aim. One agitation for liberty in Ireland 
was no sooner extinguished than another began to burn in its 
place. 

Joe Brenan's subsequent career was brief. He made his 
way to America — to New Orleans, that wonderful city on 
the Mississippi, which is still a marvellous combination of 
France before the Eevolution, of tropical Creole life, and of 
modern American enterprise, and which was then still more 
striking and vivid in its contrast than it now is. There he 
founded a newspaper, and there he married — but not the 
love of his youth, not ' Mary of the Nation.'' She died un- 
married. Blindness came upon him, and he wrote some 
melancholy, beautiful verses upon the calamity which dark- 
ened his life. That life was not long. He died while he was 
still what may be called a young man. His life was not 
happy in the ordinary sense in which we value the word 
happiness. His dearest hopes were withered, the noon of his 
youth was darkened, and his Hfe cut off in its bloom. But he 
did a good work worthily. He did his best to animate the 
national cause, at a time when the national cause seemed low 
indeed ; and his name will always be held in honourable 
affection by his countrymen. 



141 

CHAPTER XIII. 

THE IRISH BRIGADE. 

The failure of the Young Ireland movement flung Ireland 
back upon a long period of political apathy and domestic 
wretchedness. Starvation and misery forced the people into 
steady and incessant emigration. Eviction was in full swing, 
and between eviction and emigration it is estimated that 
almost a million of people left Ireland between 1847 and 
1857. ' In a few years more,' said the Times exultingly, * a 
Celtic Irishman will be as rare in Connemara as is the Red 
Indian on the shores of the Manhattan.' That the Times 
was not a true prophet was not the fault of the majority of 
the Irish landlords. Evictions took place by the hundred, by 
the thousand, by the ten thousand — evictions as much for 
grazier's purposes as for non-payment of rent, which in those 
evil days of famine and failure they could not pay. Winter 
or summer, day or night, fair or foul weather, the tenants 
were ejected. Sick or well, bedridden or dying, the tenants — 
men', women, or children — were turned out. They might go to 
America if they could ; they might die on the roadside if so 
it pleased them. They were out of the hut, and the hut was 
unroofed that they might not seek its shelter again, and that 
was all the landlord cared about. The expiring evicted tenant 
might, said Mitchel, raise his dying eyes to heaven and bless 
his God that he perished under the finest constitution in the 
world. 

It is hardly a matter of surprise, however much of regret 
and reprobation, that the lives of the evicting landlords should 
often be in peril, and sometimes be taken. At that time the 
Ribbon organisation flourished. The Ribbon organisation, 
and kindred associations, were rendered inevitable by the 
conditions under which the Irish peasantry were compelled to 
live. Given a dominant landlord class, either of another race 
themselves, or supported by their adhesion to that other race ; 



142 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

given the existence of a body of laws which allowed every 
right to the landlord and no right to the tenant ; given long 
years of landlord tyranny and eviction, on the top of famine, 
and it was simply a matter of logical necessity that bodies like 
the Ribbon Society should come into existence a,nd flourish. 
In them the peasant saw his only defence against the hateful 
landlord class, and the no less hateful law which sustained that 
landlord class in its worst actions. 

There is a fine passage in Gerald Griffin's immortal 
novel, ' The Collegians,' which bears striking testimony to 
the way in which English law was then, and has been ever 
since, regarded by the Irish peasant. ' The peasantry of 
Ireland have, for centuries, been at war with the laws by 
which they are governed, and watch their operation in every 
instance with a jealous eye. Even guilt itself, however 
naturally atrocious, obtains a commiseration in their regard, 
from the mere spirit of opposition to a system of Government 
which they consider unfriendly. There is scarcely a cottage 
in the South of Ireland where the very circumstance of legal 
denunciation would not afford, even to a murderer, a certain 
passport and concealment and protection.' 

There have been many secret societies in the modern 
history of Europe — the Tugendbund, the Carbonari, and the 
Camorra — but none have been more remarkable, more mys- 
terious, or, for a time, more successful than the Ribbon 
Society. ' It is assuredly strange, indeed, almost incredible, 
that although the existence of this organisation was, in a 
general v»^ay, as well and as widely known as the fact that 
Queen Victoria reigned, or that Daniel O'Connell was once a 
living man ; although the story of its crimes has thrilled judge 
and jury, and Parliamentary committees have filled ponderous 
bluebooks with evidence of its proceedings, there is to this 
hour the wildest conflict of assertion and conclusion as to 
what exactly were its real aims, its origin, structure, charac- 
ter, and purpose.' 

For more than half a century the Ribbon Society has 
existed in Ireland, and even yet it is impossible to say how it 



THE IRISH BRIGADE 143 

began, how it is organised, and what are its exact purposes. 
Its aim seems cliiefly to have been to defend the land-serf 
from the hmdlord ; but it often had a strong pohtical purpose 
as welL The late Mr. A. M. Sullivan stated that he long ago 
satisfied himself that the Ribbonism of one period was not the 
Eibbonism of another, and that the version of its aims and 
character prevalent among its members in one part of Ireland 
often differed widely from that professed in some other part of 
the country. ' In Ulster it professed to be a defensive or re- 
taliatory league against Orangeism ; in Munster it was first a 
combination against the tithe-proctors ; in Connaught it was 
an organisation against rack-renting and evictions ; in Leinster 
it was often mere trade unionism, dictating by its mandates 
and enforcing by its vengeance the employment or dismissal 
of workmen, stewards, and even domestics.' 

All sorts of evidence and information of the most confused 
kind has, from time to time, been given respecting Ribbonism, 
much of it the merest fiction. All that is certain is that it, 
and many other formidable organisations, existed among the 
peasantry of different parts of Ireland. 

Many of the landlords themselves were in no enviable con- 
dition. Mortgages and settlements of all kinds, the results of 
their own or of their ancestors' profuseness, hung on their 
estates, and made many a stately showing rent-roll the 
merest simulacrum of territorial wealth. Even rack-rents 
could not enable many of the landlords to keep their 
heads above water. At length the Government made an 
effort to relieve their condition by passing the Encumbered 
Estates Act, by means of which a landlord or his creditors 
might petition to have an estate sold in the Court established 
for that purpose under the Act. Later, by a Supplementary 
Irish Landed Estates Act, the powers of the Court were in- 
creased to allow the sale of properties that were not encumbered' 
When Government has hitherto had to legislate for Ireland, 
it has usually displayed a pleasing alacrity in legislating for 
the advantage of the Irish landlord class, and a corresponding 
perfunctory unwillingness to legislate for the Irish peasant. 



144 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

The vast body of the Irish people cared Httle or nothing for 
the legislation that was to the advantage of the landlord class. 
They regarded, and rightly regarded, that class as the curse 
of their country. 

But the wants of the tenant closely concerned the Irish 
race ; and in August, 1850, those who sympathised with the 
tenants' cause began to agitate for legislation. A conference 
was called by Dr., afterwards Sir, John Gray, the Protestant 
owner of the Freeman's Journal, by the Presbyterian barrister 
Mr. Greer, who later represented Derry in Parliament, and by 
Frederick Lucas, the Catholic owner of the Tablet. A confer- 
ence of men of all classes and creeds was held in Dublin — ' a 
conference,' Mr. Bright called it in the House of Commons, 
'of earnest men from all parts of Ireland,' and a Tenant 
League was started. Everything was against the League 
The indifference of England and the prostration of the 
country after the famine and the rebellion, the apathy, even 
the hostility, of the Irish Liberal members were all combined 
against it. Then came the reorganisation of the Catholic 
Church in England, and Lord John Kussell's ' Durham 
Letter,' which for the time made any political alliance be- 
tween the Catholics and Protestants impossible. 

But when, in 1852, the Whig Ministry went out, and Lord 
Derby, coming in with the Tories, dissolved Parliament, the 
chance of the Tenant Leaguers came. Some fifty tenant- 
right members were elected. It seemed for a moment as if a 
new era had dawned for Ireland. The country had for a time 
a large body of representatives pledged together for a common 
purpose of a truly national character. Many of the men who 
had been elected were men of the highest character, honour, 
and patriotism. Conspicuous among the champions of tenant- 
right was Charles Gavan Duffy, who has complained very in- 
accurately and unreasonably that the services of the tenant- 
right party have been under-rated and even ignored by the 
leaders of the modern political movement. There was a 
short and distinguished Parliamentary career waiting for 
Charles Gavan Duffy, before he went across the seas to find 



THE ITiTSB BRIGADE 145 

in a new world that fair fortune wliicli was denied to him and 
to all national Irishmen in his own country. 

Another conspicuous figure in the movement was Fred- 
erick Lucas, one of the most upright and pure-minded of 
politicians, a man whose name was destined to become very 
famous in Irish politics, and who was destined himself to be- 
come the leader of an Irish party expressing opinions which 
would have appeared strangely advanced to the tenant-righters, 
although they seem strangely behind the age to us of to-day. 
Isaac Butt was elected for Youghal ; in Mr. John Francis 
Maguire, Ireland had a representative, eloquent, honest, and 
able — a man who might be called national in the sense that 
Irish members of Parliament in those days were national 
and who at all times did his best to be of service to his 
country. 

Unfortunately for the country and the cause, the tenant- 
right party in the House of Commons contained members — 
and those unhappily among the most prominent — who were 
neither pure, nor honourable, nor patriotic. Among the most 
conspicuous of the tenant-right party in the House of Com- 
mons—the Irish Brigade, as it came to be called — was the 
once famous John Sadleir. His lieutenants were his brother, 
James Sadleir, Mr. William Keogh, and Mr. Edmund O'Fla- 
herty : these men were all adventurers, and most of them 
swindlers. They were known as the Brass Band. John 
Sadleir was a man of remarkable ability, and still more re- 
markable audacity. He was absolutely unprincipled. He 
regarded the cause with which he was connected solely as 
a means of advancing the seliish personal interests of himself 
and of his accomplices. He w^as not merely a political adven- 
turer, a Lismahago of the House of Commons ; he was a 
swindler of no ordinary un scrupulousness, and no ordinary 
address. He got about him a gang of rascals like himself, 
no less unscrupulous, only a little less gifted in deceit and in 
fraud. 

For a time this Sanhedrim of scoundrels deceived the 
Irish people by their pretensions and protestations. The 

Ii 



146 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Sadleirs owned the Tipperary bank, one of the most popular 
banks in Ireland ; they had plenty of money, and spent it 
lavishly ; they started a paper, the Telegraph, to keep them 
before the public ; they were good speakers, and they led good 
speakers ; they were demonstratively Catholic, and for a time 
a good many people believed in them. Sadleir even succeeded 
in getting some honest men, who had been sent to represent 
Irish constituencies m Parliament, to believe in him and his 
lofty purposes, and so to further his secret aims by lending 
their respectability and their righteousness to him and his 
gang. Even however when the power of Sadleir was at its 
highest, he was distrusted by most intelligent Irishmen ; and 
that distrust was soon justified. 

Lord Derby went out of office, and Whig Lord Aberdeen 
came in, and the members of the noisy, blatant, Brass Band 
took office under him. John Sadleir became a Lord of 
the Treasury ; Keogh was made Irish Solicitor-General ; 
O'Flaherty Commissioner of Income Tax. There was fierce 
indignation, but they kept their places and their course for 
a time. Then they broke up. John Sadleir had embezzled, 
swindled, forged ; he ruined half Ireland with his fraudulent 
bank ; he made use of his position under Government to 
embezzle public money ; he committed suicide— that is to 
say, he was supposed to have committed suicide, for there 
were many persons who believed then, and there are many 
persons who believe still, that the body which was found on 
Hampstead Heath, and which was consigned to the grave 
under circumstances of mysterious haste and secrecy, was not 
the body of John Sadleir. 

In one of the greatest of German romances, the * Flower, 
Fruit, and Thorn Pieces ' of Jean Paul Eichter, the hero 
passes himself off for dead, and seeks a new life far from his 
old home, leaving behind him an afflicted widow and sorrow- 
ing friends, under the conviction that he is no more. There 
were many persons who believed that John Sadleir, like 
another Siebenkas, had died only in name, and was quietly 
enjoying the rewards of his deception in the security of self- 



THE IBIS IT BRIGADE 147 

chosen exile. The story is not very credible, but it will at 
least serve to show what public opinion at the time thought 
of John Sadleir, and of John Sadleir's ingenuity, and of John 
Sadleir's morality. 

His brother James, his confederate, was formally expelled 
from the House of Commons, a punishment so rarely exer- 
cised in our time that it might almost be said to be non- 
existent. O'Flaherty hurried to Denmark, where there was 
no extradition treaty, and then to New York, where he lived 
— and, we believe, still lives — under another name, a familiar 
figure in certain circles of New York society, famous as a 
diner-out, as a good story-teller, and a humourist — a sort 
of combination of Brillat Savarin and the later Eichelieu, 
with a dash of Gines de Pasamonte. Keogh, the fourth of 
this famous quadrilateral, their ally, their intimate, their 
faithful friend, contrived to keep himself clear of the crash. 
He was immediately made a judge, and was conspicuous for 
the rest of his life for his unfailing and unaltering hostility to 
any and every national party. 

Only a Persius, or a Pascal, could do full justice to the 
history of this extraordinary quadrilateral. The story may, 
however, be summed up somewhat epigrammatically thus : 
There were once four men, close friends, companions, allies, 
partners in politics, partners in finance, bound in a brother- 
hood of common aims and common interests. One was a 
forger and swindler, who committed suicide ; another was a 
swindler, who was expelled from the House of Commons, and 
who fled the country ; the third embezzled public money, and 
also fled the country ; the fourth was made a judge. 

It is not to be wondered at that the lamentable end of the 
Brass Band, and the disasters of the tenant-right movement, 
should have produced another period of political apathy in 
Ireland as far as constitutional agitation was concerned. 
But there were other agitations on foot. Another experiment, 
which had been tried and failed in 1848, was to be tried again 
under new conditions. 

X.2 



148 IRELAND SINCE THE TTNION 

CHAPTER XIV. 

THE PH(ENIX CONSPIEAOY. 

After the failure of the revolutionary movement of 1848, 
and of the slight attempt of the succeeding year, Ireland was 
left for a time unmoved by any active efforts at insurrection. 
But the revolutionary spirit was only quiescent, not extinct. 
It was destined to break out again in a fashion much more 
dangerous than that of the Young Ireland movement, under 
the leadership of men far more determined and desperate, and 
with results far more serious. 

At the time wlian Smith O'Brien and his followers were 
skirmishing with the police at Ballingarry, there was among 
the insurgents a young man named James Stephens. Stephens 
was at that time about twenty- four years old. He was born in 
Kilkenny in 1824, of comparatively humble parents, who were 
able, however, to give their son a good education, of which he 
availed himself to the utmost. His mathematical tastes led 
him to devote himself to engineering ; and in his twentieth 
year he obtained an appointment on the Limerick and Water- 
ford Railway, which was then being constructed. When the 
railway was completed he was thrown out of work for a while, 
and he came to Dublin to find occupation. The Young Ire- 
land movement was in full swing at the time, and it soon 
drew the gifted young engineer into its charmed circle. 
Stephens was a clever young man, an ardent Nationalist, eager, 
like all the young Irelanders, to conquer or to die for his 
native country. He came very near to dying in that fight 
with the police at Ballingarry. From the cottage in which 
they had taken refuge, the police were firing as fast as they 
could upon their besiegers, and one of their bullets found its 
billet in James Stephens' body. He fell, rolled behind a hedge, 
and was left there, either unnoticed or regarded as dead, after 
Smith O'Brien and his party had dispersed, and the police had 
left the farm-house. 



THE niCENIX CONSPIRACY 149 

A few days later paragraphs in the newspapers announced 
to all that were interested that James Stephens was dead and 
buried * Poor James Stephens,' so one paragraph ran, ' who 
followed Smith 0'l>rien to the field, has died of the wound 
which he received at Ballingarry while acting as aide-de-camp 
to the insurgent leader. Mr. Stephens was a very amiable 
and, apart from politics, most inoffensive young man, pos- 
sessed of a great deal of talent, and we believe he was a most 
excellent son and brother. His untimely and melancholy fate 
will be much regretted by a numerous circle of friends.' 
Stephens' family and friends took good care to support by every 
means in their power the story of his death. 

It would have been well for the English Government if 
the Ballingarry bullet had been surer in its aim, and if the 
newspaper paragraph had been true. But the news was not 
true. Stephens lay for some time where he had fallen. 
When he found himself alone, he bandaged his wound as best 
he could, exchanged clothes with a peasant, and after an 
interview with his sweetheart, which dangerously jeopardised 
his safety, sought hiding in the mountains. In the mountains 
he found a companion in misfortune, seeking, like himself, 
shelter from the harsh pursuit of the law. This was Michael 
John Doheny, the gifted child of a peasant race, the eloquent 
speaker and unselfish patriot. 

The Hue and Cry of the day, which has left us so many gro- 
tesque, and some life-like portraits of the men who were wanted 
by the police, because they were Irishmen and enemies of the 
foreign dominion, thus describes Stephens' companion : 
' Michael John Doheny, barrister, age about forty, height 
five feet eight inches, sandy hair, grey eyes, coarse, red face 
like that of a man given to drink, high cheek bones, wants 
several of his teeth, very vulgar appearance, peculiar, coarse, 
unpleasant voice, small red whiskers, dresses respectably.' 

Doheny has left on record, in his fascinating ' Felon's Track,' 
the strange story of the six weeks of adventures and sufferings 
and privations w^iich he and Stephens shared together while 
they were in hiding. In sunshine and storm, along sides of 



150 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

mountains, and across the cold courses of mountain torrents, 
tlirougli thick woods, and on bleak hill- sides, the refugees 
made their desperate way. Sometimes they were pursued by 
the police ; sometimes, though rarely, they ran the risk of 
being delivered up to their enemies ; sometimes they en- 
countered cold looks from those who should have been their 
friends ; but more often they found welcome and shelter and 
sustenance from the peasantry whom they had hoped to emanci- 
pate. The courage of the two men never for a moment de- 
serted them through the whole time when, in Doheny's expres- 
sive phrase, they were under the shadow of the gibbet. Doheny 
was always ready whenever they sat and rested to write glow- 
ing vc*"ses. Stephens' mind was ever fertile in the formation 
of plans either for the furtherance of their own escape or for 
the purpose of kidnapping Lord John Eussell. 

Once, and once only, according to Doheny, did the courage 
of James Stephens seem likely to give way. This was when he 
learned that the woman to whom he was devoted was no 
longer true to him. But he rallied even against this stroke ; 
his love for the cause and the country to which he had vowed 
himself was able to dwarf and conquer all other emotions, 
and he soon shook off the sick mood of despondency in which he 
had declared himself unwilling to make any further efforts to 
secure his safety. 

When the little plan for carrying oif Lord John Russell was 
baffled by the Prime Minister's unexpected departure, Stephens 
left Ireland in dis.^^uise, and made his way across England to 
France. In Paris he was joined some little time later by 
Doheny, who had left Ireland about a week after the departure 
of Stephens, and Avho made his way with more difficulty 
across England. The two were shortly reinforced by the arri- 
val of a third Young Irelander, John O'Mahony. O'Mahony 
had lingered in Ireland for a considerable time after the 
failure of Smith O'Brien's rising. He commanded a rather 
large body of men and had control of some arms, and fjr 
a time he and his followers lurked among the mountains, 
licping that something might yet happen to speed the insur- 



THE FlIiKNIX CONSPIRACY 151 

rection to success. But nothing did happen. O'Mahony 
became convinced that for the time the revolution was over ; 
he dismissed his guerilla army to drift to all the points of the 
compass, and made the best of his way to Paris. There he 
and Stephens remained for some years. Doheny had gone to 
the United States to make his way as a journalist and barrister, 
and to foster by all the means in his power the national 
cause. 

It must not be supposed that all secret agitation died out 
in Ireland with the suppression of the Young Ireland move- 
ment, or of that later movement with which Fintan Lalor and 
Brenan were associated. Though many Young Irelanders 
and their accomplices who were not in the hands of the police 
sought safety in exile, the vast bulk of the conspirators 
remained at home. Of this large body the greater proportion 
dropped out of agitation and fell back into private life, and 
into the fulfilment of their ordinary daily tasks and daily 
duties. But a certain number still remained bound together 
by the bonds of secret association in certain of the larger 
cities. These small associations wei'e centres of latent activity, 
ready to be employed at any time in widening their circle of 
agitation. Each of them was a focus from which the rays of 
revolution might be directed when the hour came, and brought 
the man with it. The hour and the man came with the 
decade of 1850, and the visit of James Stephens to Ireland. 

The outbreak of the Crimean War, and the complications 
in which it involved England on the Continent and in the 
East, appeared to Stephens to offer happy opportunities for 
the renewal of active agitation. There is a story current that 
Kussian agents sought out Stephens, and encouraged him to 
incite a new revolutionary movement in Ireland. This may 
or may not be true. It is doubtful whether at that time the 
Russian Government were sufficiently well aware of the 
seriousness of Irish discontent. But in any case, we may well 
believe that James Stephens needed no encouragement from 
Eussian or other emissaries to induce him to seize the favour- 
able hour, to seize the favourable moment, for again repeat- 



152 IF ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

ing Ireland's protest against her hard Government. So 
Stephens came over to Ireland, and made a tour of personal 
inspection of the comitry, accompanied by Thomas Clarke 
Luby. He saw for himself that the country was only out- 
wardly quiescent ; that the desire for national rights and 
national liberties v>^as even stronger than it had been in 1848 ; 
that it only needed skill, and judgment, and patience to set on 
foot a movement which should do more effective service to the 
country than Young Ireland. 

These small bodies of secret disaffection, which have been 
already mentioned, gave great support to Stephens in his visit, 
and received from him fresh inspiration for the spread of their 
propaganda. But if the rough outline of Stephens' plans was 
readily found, it took a long time to mature. The Crimean 
War passed away without awakening any active disturbance 
in Ireland ; but the preparations for disturbance were surely 
and slowly progressing. In the town of Skibbereen there was 
a small club or reading-room, apparently of no great import- 
ance either as a literary or as a political centre. But it was 
destined to prove of very great importance, and gave its name 
to an unsuccessful conspiracy which was destined to be the 
parent of a far greater conspiracy. 

This small body or association was called the * Phoenix 
National and Literary Society.' Many of the young men of 
the town were its members : and it was apparently merely 
a kind of literary institute. It covered under its seemingly 
harmless appearance one of those small centres of secret 
agitation ah-eady mentioned. One of its most conspicuous 
members was Jeremiah O'Donovan, later known as O'Don- 
ovan Eossa. In the members of the PhoBnix Literary Society, 
Stephens, then in Ireland, found ready and willing confede- 
rates ; and from tLcin and their institution came the name 
given to Stephens' organisation, then in process of formation, 
There was something in the title which appealed particularly 
and appropriately to the minds of Irish conspirators. Every 
Irish insurrectionary movement had risen, Phoenix-like, from 
the ashes of some preceding agitation. So the name Phoenix 



THE PIICENIX CONSPIRACY 153 

was adopted ; and, had the Fates been propitious, it might 
have become the title of the greater movement which succeeded 
it, instead of hviiig in history merely as the name of a prema- 
turely-destroyed conspiracy. 

A little before the time when James Stephens was finding 
welcome and sympathy, and a name for his organisation, at 
the hands of the Skibbereen Literary Society, another distin- 
guished Irish rebel had returned to his native land. In 185G 
Mr. William Smith O'Brien was allowed to return to Ireland 
mider an unconditional amnesty. He had been for some time 
set free from absolute imprisonment ; but it was only now 
that permission to return to his own country was accorded 
to him. The Government, which seldom did any gracious 
act except by halves, allowed Smith O'Brien to breathe his 
native air without fear of arrest as a felon ; but it refused to 
allow him the rank and title which were his by right, as the 
brother of Lord Inchiquin. Smith O'Brien, we may feel 
sure, cared very little for any honours of which the Govern- 
ment were able to deprive him. The honour of a place of 
foremost affection in the hearts and minds of his countrymen 
the Government could not take away. 

In the dead calm which seemed to come over Irish life, 
something like a ripple was produced in the return home of 
a Young Ireland leader. There were enthusiastic demonstra- 
tions in his honour, and he was earnestly entreated to once 
again represent an Irish constituency in the English Parlia- 
ment. This, however, Smith O'Brien refused to do. The 
bright hopes of ten years earlier had faded away. He ^,■as 
not less national than he had been, but he was less sanguine 
of immediate success, and he was most unwilling to return 
to any active personal part in the cause. His interest in, and 
his affection for the country and the cause was as deep as 
ever ; and a little later he made a tour of Ireland, in which 
he was received with enthusiasm wherever he went, and in 
the course of which he made an important speech on ground 
which was historic ground for him. At Clonmel, where he 
and so many of his companions had been tried and sentenced 



154 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

to death, he was presented with an address ; and he made a 
reply to the address which was full of a sad and lenient dignity 
and courage. He spoke sorrowfully of forty-eight and its 
failure ; but he declared that he was as devoted now as he 
had been then to the principles which had led him to risk 
his life with the lives of his friends and followers in his 
country's cause. 

The speech naturally created much interest ; and it pro- 
voked an article in the London Tiines which was in its way a 
masterpiece of political folly, and of that curious misapprecia- 
tion of facts, that lack of historical insight, which has always 
been the chief characteristic of English journalism in its 
speculations on Irish affairs. The Times was pleased to be 
somewhat scornfully amused over the utteiances of the re- 
turned rebel. It pointed exultantly to the absolute peace, 
tranquillity, and contentment of Ireland ; and it scoffingly 
assured Smith O'Brien, and such few persons as sympathised 
with him, that the days of rebels, and agitation, and conspi- 
racy in Ireland were over, for good and all. At this time 
when these weighty words were being penned, at this time 
when the English Press was so confident that order reigned 
in Ireland, the Irish Executive was preparing to make a descent 
upon a formidable secret conspiracy which had been brought 
to its notice, and which was to be the parent of a conspiracy 
many times more formidable than any which had yet occurred 
in the history of the relations of the two countries. 

It soon became bruited abroad that the Phoenix organisa- 
tion was spreading rapidly ; it soon came to be known, too, in 
that vague, indefinable way in which things do get to be 
known in political life before they actually occur, that the 
Government intended to make sharp and short work with the 
new conspiracy. Some Nationalists conceived it to be within 
their duty to make public protest against the new movement. 
Mr. Smith O'Brien, forgetting entirely, or apparently forget- 
ting entirely, the history of his own struggle little more than 
ten years earlier with O'Connell, judged it advisable to write 
a letter to the Nation, appealing to the Irish people against 



THE PHCENIX COl^SPIRACY 155 

the Phoenix conspiracy. Mr. John Dillon, wiser then, as he 
had been wiser ten years before, than his chief, refused to 
make any demonstration against the Phoenix Society, and 
considered that public interference was most inadvisable. 

In all probability the Irish Government had made up 
their minds to crush out the conspiracy before Mr. Smith 
O'Brien's letter made its appearance. But such a letter 
would probably, in any case, have only encouraged instead of 
dissuading them from the course upon which they had re- 
solved. On December 3, 1858, a viceregal proclamation 
warned the country that great danger was caused by the 
existence of a secret society. Within a few days this procla- 
mation was followed up by a series of raids in different towns 
in Ireland, upon men known, or suspected to be, members of 
the Phoenix Society. There were a series of protracted trials, 
which revealed little or nothing, beyond the fact that in 
certain districts young men had banded themselves together 
into a secret organisation for the purpose of secret drilling, 
and that the organisation had an occult leader who was 
known as ' the Hawk,' and was pretty generally understood 
to be James Stephens. 

One of the prisoners, Daniel O'Sullivan, a National School 
teacher, was brilliantly defended by the late Lord O'Hagan — 
then Mr. Thomas O'Hagan. The jury disagreed. O'Sullivan 
was tried again ; and objecting to the unfairness with which 
the jury was packed, he refused to make any defence, was 
convicted, and sentence^ to ten years' penal servitude. The 
other Phoenix prisoners were induced to plead guilty, and 
were released. Such was apparently the end of the Phoenix 
conspiracy. The Government fondly fancied they had done 
with it and all kinds of agitation for long enough. They did 
not dream that from the extinct association another conspiracy 
would arise, which would have its home in two hemispheres. 
' The last of the Gracchi,' said Mirabeau, ' dying, flung dust 
to heaven, and from that dust sprang Marius.' From the 
dust of the exploded Phoenix conspiracy rose the far more 
formidable imafje of Fenianism. 



156 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

CHAPTEE XV. 

JOHN DILLON AND JOHN BEIGHT. 

The General Election of 1865 was in its results one of the 
most remarkable that have occmTed during the whole of the 
Victorian epoch. It marked the passing away of an old order 
and the beginning of a new. Not long before it took place Mr. 
Gladstone had made himself conspicuous as the sympathiser 
with, and supporter of, advanced Kadical ideas. The politician 
who had been looked upon in his youth as the rising hope of 
the stern and unbending Tories, had passed from Conservatism, 
through Conservative Liberalism, unto pure and undiluted 
Liberalism. He was even, in those days, regarded as a 
Radical. Mr. Gladstone's process of conversion showed that 
the tide of Liberalism was running high ; the result of the 
General Election proved it still more conclusively. 

Mr. Disraeli, with the keen political insight which at once 
perceives the chief historical characteristic of any great event, 
declared in a speech, shortly after the General Election, that 
the new Parliament had very greatly increased the power and 
the following of Mr. Bright. This was, indeed, the most 
conspicuous result of the election. Mr. Bright was at that 
time regarded as the champion of advanced thought, as the 
hero and the herald of Eadical principles and Radical reforms. 
His position in the new Parliament was very strong. Death 
had taken from his side, shortly before the new Parliament 
came into existence, his friend and companion, Richard 
Cobden ; but death had also, almost immediately after the 
birth of the new Parliament, taken away Lord Palmerston, 
who was the most serious barrier to the progress of the new 
ideas of which Mr. Bright was regarded as the apostle. 

Men of rare gifts and rare genius came with that election 
for the first time into Parliamentary life, and rallied under- 
neath Mr. Bright's banner. Mostconspicuous among English 
members was John Stuart Mill, who had been successfully 



JOHN niLLOK AND JOHN BRIGHT 157 

induced to come from his philosophic retirement in pleasant 
Avignon, and to dedicate for a season his fine intellect to the 
active service of the Radical party. Most conspicuous amongst 
Irish members was John Dillon. 

John Dillon entered Parliament in 1865, as he had entered 
upon revolution in 1848, from a strong conviction of the duty 
he owed to his country. We have seen that he had not been 
anxious for revolution in the Young Ireland days ; that he 
had opposed the premature explosion of insurrection as long 
as he could ; but that when he saw a rising to be inevitable, 
he threw in his lot with it as composedly as if he had approved 
of it from the beginning, and shared heroically the conse- 
quences of a catastrophe which he had striven to avert. 
After the rising failed, he succeeded in making his escape, 
and he lived for many years in exile in the United States. 
In later years a general amnesty allowed him to return to 
his own country. It was urged upon him that he could be 
of service to his country by entering Parliament, and he 
accepted the duty. 

Like many other Irishmen at that time, John Dillon was 
a great admirer and implicit believer in John Bright. Mr. 
John Dillon might very well believe that the Irish people and 
the representatives of the Irish people had a friend ih Mr. 
John Bright. Mr. John Dillon was always a student of the 
political history of his time, and the utterances of Mr. John 
Bright might well have convinced a man of a more sceptical 
nature than Mr. John Dillon ever was, that Mr. Bright was a 
sustained and devoted friend to Ireland. There is no more 
instructive study for the Irish Nationalist of to-day than those 
volumes of Mr. Bright's collected speeches w^liich contain his 
utterances delivered on Irish questions. They deserve to be 
read and re-read far oftener than they are. They have been 
called attention to from time to time by Irish politicians. A 
writer, some few years ago, at a period of acute political crisis, 
ventured to make public certain extracts from them which 
had a curious bearing upon Mr. Bright's conduct towards the 
Land League and its supporters. But it will not be out of 



158 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

place here, after some of the very recent utterances of Mr. 
Bright on the Irish question in and out of the House of Com- 
mons, to look over some of these Irish speeches of his, and 
see what it was that made Mr. John Dillon regard him with 
such admiration. 

In the year 1845, in a speech on the Maynooth Grant 
question, Mr. Bright, who had then only been but a short 
time in the House, raised his voice to^point out the wrongs 
of Ireland. ' I assert that the Protestant Church of Ireland 
is at the root of the evils of that country, The Irish Catho- 
lics would thank you infinitely more if you were to wipe out 
that foul blot, than they would even if Parliament were to 
establish the Eoman Catholic Church alongside of it. They 
have had everything Protestant— a Protestant clique that has 
been dominant in the country ; a Protestant Viceroy to distri- 
bute places and emoluments amongst that Protestant clique ; 
Protestant judges who have polluted the seats of justice ; 
Protestant magistrates, before whom the Catholic peasant 
could not hope for justice. They have not only Protestant, 
but exterminating landlords, and more than that, a Protestant 
soldiery, who, at the beck and command of a Protestant priest, 
have butchered and killed a Catholic peasant even in the 
presence of his widowed mother. All these things are noto- 
rious ; I merely state them. I do not bring the proof of 
them ; they are patent to all the world, and that man must 
have been inobservant indeed who is not perfectly convinced 
of their truth.' 

Two years later, in 1847, Mr. Bright, in speaking on the 
Coercion Bill, for which he felt himself compelled to vote, 
but, althougli not without making a strong protest against the 
system of governing Ireland, addressed some reproaches to 
the Irish representatives in the House of Commons for their 
inaction. * I am sure that 105, or even 30 English members, 
sitting in a Parliament in Dublin, and believing their country 
had suffered from the effects of bad legislation, would, by 
their knowledge of the case, their business habits, activity, 
union, and perseverance, have shown a powerful front, and 



JOHN BILLON AND JOHN BRIGHT 159 

by uniting together, and working manfully in favour of any 
proposition tliey might think necessary to remedy the evils 
of which they complained, they would have forced it on the 
attention of the House. But the Irish members have not 
done this. So far, then, they are and have been as much to 
blame as any other member of this House, for the absence of 
good government in Ireland.' 

It is interesting to compare these utterances of what may 
be called Mr. Bright's youth with speeches made nearly forty 
years later. When the party whose presence he had so wished 
for, that party of united Irish members, showing a powerful 
front, united together, and working manfully in favour of any 
proposition they might think necessary to remedy the evils of 
which they complained, made their appearance in the English 
House of Commons, the reception they got from Mr. Bright 
was not of the kind which they might well have expected, 
from the speech of 1847. In the same speech he said : ' We 
maintain a large army in Ireland, and an armed police, which 
is an army in everything but name, and yet we have in that 
country a condition of things which is not to be matched in 
any other civilised country of Europe, and which is alike dis- 
graceful to Ireland and to us.' 

In the following year, 1848, almost immediately after the 
Young Ireland outbreak, Mr. Bright again made a speech 
about Ireland, and again enlarged upon the injustice of 
English rule. In this speech he touched upon a question 
destined to be of the utmost importance in the history of the 
relations between England and Ireland — the Irish in America. 
' Driven forth by poverty. Irishmen emigrate in great numbers, 
and in whatever quarter of the world an Irishman sets his 
foot, there stands a bitter, an implacable enemy of England. 
That is one of the results of the wide- spread disaffection that 
exists in Ireland. There are hundreds of thousands — I sup- 
pose there are milHons — of the population of the United 
States of America who are Irish by birth, or by immediate 
descent; and, be it remembered. Irishmen settled in the 
United States have a large influence in public affairs. They 



160 IB ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

sometimes sway the election of members of the legislature, 
and may even affect the election of the President of the Ee- 
public. There may come a time when questions of a critical 
nature will be agitated between the Governments of Great 
Britain and the United States ; and it is certain that at such 
a time the Irish in that country will throw their whole weight 
into the scale against this country and against peace with this 
country. These are points which it is necessary to consider, 
and which arise out of the lamentable condition in which Ire- 
land is placed.' ; 

In the same speech he said : ' At present there prevails 
throughout th^'ee-fourths of the Irish people a total unbelief 
in the honesty and integrity of the Government of this 
country. There may or may not be grounds for all this ill- 
feeling ; but that it exists, no man acquainted with Ireland 
will deny. The first step to be taken is to remove this feel- 
ing ; and, to do this, some great measure or measures should 
be offered to the people of Ireland, which will act as a com- 
plete demonstration to them that bygones are to be bygones 
with regard to the administration of Irish affairs, and that 
henceforth, new, generous, and equal principles of govern- 
ment are to be adopted.' 

In the same speech, too, we find the following remarkable 
utterances : ' With regard to the parliamentary representation 
of Ireland, having recently spent seventy-three days in an 
examination of the subject, while serving as a member of the 
Dublin Election Committee, I assert most distinctly that the 
representation which exists at this moment is a fraud ; and I 
believe it would be far better if there were not representation 
at all, because the people would not then be deluded by the 
idea that they had a representative Government to protect 
their interests.' 

It is curious here to remember that when Ireland did 
get a body of delegates composing a less fraudulent repre- 
sentation, and possessing the confidence of the Irish people, 
they found no bitterer enemy than the man who had so 
ardently desired their existence in 1848. Mr. Bright con- 



JOHN DILLON AND JOHN BRIGHT 161 

eluded his speech with an eloquent peroration, which, coming 
at such a time, was perhaps of more value in keeping the 
spirit of agitation alive in Ireland than the fiercest utterances 
of the Nation or the United Irishman. ' Let the House, if it 
can, regard Ireland as an English country. Let us think of 
the eight millions of people, and of the millions of them 
doomed to this intolerable suffering. Let us think of the 
half million who, within two years past, have perished 
miserably in the workhouses, and on tlie highways, and in 
their hovels — more, far more, than ever fell by the sword in 
any war this country has ever waged ; let us think of the crop 
of nameless horrors which is even now growing up in Ireland, 
and whose disastrous fruit may be gathered in years and 
generations to come. Let us examine what are uhe laws and 
principles under which alone God and nature have permitted 
that nations should become industrious and provident.' 

In the following year, 1849, the year of the abortive insur- 
rection of Fintan Lawlor and Philip Grey, Mr. Bright made 
a speech which contains this famous passage : ' But the treat- 
ment of this Irish malady rem airs even the same. We have 
nothing for it still but force and arms. You have an armed 
force there of 50,000 men to keep the people quiet ; large votes 
are annually required to keep the people quiet, and large 
votes are annually required to keep the people alive. I pre- 
sume the government by troops is easy, and that the — 

Civil power may snore at ease, 

"While soldiers fire — to keep the peace 1 

*I shall be told,' said Mr. Bright, in the same speech, ' that I 
am injuring aristocratical and territorial influence. What is 
there in Ireland worth to you now ? What is Ireland worth 
to you at all ? Is she not the very symbol and token of your 
disgrace and humiliation to the whole world ? Is she not an 
incessant trouble to your Legislature, and a source of increased 
expense to your people, already overtaxed ? Is not your 
legislation all at fault in what it has hitherto done for that 
country ? The people of Ulster say that we shall weaken the 

M 



162 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Union. It has been one of the misfortunes of the legislation 
of this House that there has been no honest attempt to make 
a Union with the whole people of Ireland up to this time. . . . 
Hon. gentlemen turn with triumph to neighbouring countries, 
and speak m glowing terms of our glorious constitution. It 
is true that abroad thrones and dynasties have been over- 
turned, whilst in England peace has reigned undisturbed. 
But take all the lives that have been lost in the last twelve 
months in Europe amidst the convulsions that have occurred 
— take all the cessation of trade, destruction of industry, all 
the crushing of hopes and hearts, and they will not compare 
for an instant with the agonies which have been endured by 
the population of Ireland under your glorious constitution.' 

There now seems a gap in Mr. Bright's speeches on Ire- 
land, a gap of nearly twenty years. Once again insurrection is 
in the air ; once again men are planning and arming secretly 
to attempt the regeneration of Ireland, and once again Mr. 
Bright comes forward, eloquent upon the injuries that Ireland 
has sustained, eloquent upon her wrongs, Jier sufferings, her 
humiliation. 

* I believe that if the majority of the people of Ireland, 
counted fairly out, had their will, and if they had the power, 
they would unmoor the island from its fastenings in the deep, 
and move it at least two thousand miles to the west. And I 
believe, further, that if by conspiracy or insurrection, or by 
that open agitation to which alone I ever would give any 
favour or consent, they could shake off the authority, I will 
not say of the English Crown, but of the Imperial Parlia- 
ment, they would gladly do so. . . . Sixty-five years ago this 
country and this Parliament undertook to govern Ireland. I 
will say nothing of the manner in which that duty was brought 
upon us except this — that it was by proceedings disgraceful 
and corrupt to the last degree. I will say nothing of the 
pretences under which it was brought about but this — that 
the English Parliament and people, and the Irish people too, 
were told that if they once got rid of the Irish Parliament 
they would dethrone for ever Irish factions, and that with a 



JOHN DILLON AND JOHN BRtGlIT ir,-] 

nnitod Parliament we should become a united, and stronger, 
and happier people.' During these sixty-five years Mr. Bright 
went on to show that only three measures had been passed 
in the interests of Ireland. One of these was the Catholic 
Emancipation Act, which, as Mr. Bright proved, was only 
conceded out of fear of civil war ; the other two were the 
measures for the relief of the poor and the sale of encum- 
bered estates. * Except on these two emergencies I appeal 
to every Irish member, and to every English member who 
has paid any attention to the matter, whether the statement 
is not true that this Parliament has done nothing for the 
people of Ireland. And, more than that, their complaints 
have been met — often by denial, often by insult, often by 
contempt.' 

In the same speech Mr. Bright asked a question which 
had a peculiar pertinence at a time when the movement was 
chiefly organised by Irish- Americans. ' Why does every 
Irishman who leaves his country and goes to the United 
States, immediately settle himself down there, resolved to 
better his condition in life, but with a feeling of ineradicable 
hatred to the laws and institutions of the land of his birth ? ' 
Then comes a passage which really reads like a satire upon 
Mr. Bright's latest political pronouncements : ' Now, sir, a 
few days ago everybody in this House, with two or three ex- 
ceptions, was taking an oath at that table. It is called the 
Oath of Allegiance. It is meant at once to express loyalty 
and to keep men loyal. I do not think it generally does bind 
men to loyalty if they have not loyalty without it. I hold loyalty 
to consist, in a country like this, as much in doing justice to 
the people as in guarding the Crown ; for I believe there is no 
guardianship of the Crown in a country like this, where the 
Crown is not supposed to rest absolutely upon force, so safe 
as that of which we know more in our day, probably, than has 
been known in former periods of our history, when the occu- 
pant of the throne is respected, admired, and loved by the 
general people. Now, how comes it that these great statesmen 
whom I have named, with all their colleagues — some of them 

M 2 



164 litELAJVD SINCE THE UNION 

almost as eminent as their leaders — have never tried what 
they could do, have never shown their loyalty to the Crown by 
endeavouring to make the Queen as safe in the hearts of the 
people of Ireland as she is in the hearts of the people of 
England and Scotland ? ' 

It is interesting to find that Mr. Bright considers loyalty 
to consist as much in doing justice to the people as in guarding 
the Crown, and it will be interesting to know, too, why he 
defines a party who are occupied in doing justice to their own 
people as a rebel party. Either Mr. Bright has forgotten his 
definition of loyalty, or he has changed his mind. Then 
came a passage that might have been, but was not, repeated 
by him during recent times of trial. * You may pass 
this Bill,' said Mr. Bright— the House was discussing a 
Coercion measure — ' you may put the Home Secretary's 500 
men into jail; you may do more than this you may suppress 
the conspiracy and put dow^n the insurrection — but the 
moment it is suppressed there will still remain the germs of 
this malady, and from those germs will grow up, as hereto- 
fore, another crop of insurrection and another harvest of 
misfortune. And it may be that those who sit here eighteen 
years after this movement will find another Ministry and 
another Secretary of State, ready to propose to you another 
administration of the same ever-failing and ever-poisonous 
medicine.' 

All these speeches that have been quoted were made 
during the lifetime of Mr. John Dillon. Listening to such 
speeches, or reading the reports of them, the true-hearted 
and simple-minded gentleman who represented Tipperary 
might very well have believed that Mr. Bright was one 
of Ireland's best friends. A great dinner was organised, 
chiefly by Mr. Dillon, to be given in honour of Mr. Bright, 
in Dublin. Mr. Dillon fully believed that the regeneration of 
Ireland was to be effected by union between the English 
Liberals and the leaders of opinion in Ireland. To effect this 
union he laboured for all the last years of his life ; and this 
banquet to Mr. Bright was intended to be a sort of inaugura- 



JonX DlLLOy AXJJ JOHN BlilGIlT 165 

tion of the accomplished thing, and the herald of a happier 
state of things. 

When all the preparations were completed for the banquet, 
at wliic-h, if we remember rightly, Mr. Dillon w^as to have taken 
the chair, Mr. Dillon suddenly died, and deprived Irish politics 
of one of the bravest and one of the sincerest of her soldiers 
and her statesmen. The banquet was not abandoned. It 
went on in spite of the loss which the two parties, who were 
thus to be politically bound together, sustained by Mr. Dillon's 
death. The chair was then taken by another Irish member, 
who was then regarded in England, and in Ireland, as a very 
advanced politician indeed, The O'Donoghue, who was, per- 
haps, a more appropriate chairman for any assembly at which 
Mr. Bright was going to speak than John Dillon could have 
been. Mr. Bright made a speech which he began by paying 
an eloquent tribute to the memory of the dead man. ' I speak 
with grief when I say that one of our friends who signed that 
invitation is no longer with us. I had not the pleasure of 
a long acquaintance with Mr. Dillon, but I shall take this 
opportunity of s.iying that during the last session of Parlia- 
ment I formed a very high opinion of his character. There 
was that in his eye, and in the tone of his voice — in his 
manner altogetlier— which marked him for an honourable and 
a just man. I venture to say that this sad and sudden re- 
moval is a great loss to Ireland. I believe amongst all her 
worthy sons, Ireland has had no worthier and no nobler son 
than John Blake Dillon.' 

Then Mr. Bright proceeded to examine the position of 
Ireland. ' There are some,' he said, ' who say that the great 
misfortune of Ireland is in the existence of the noxious class 
of political agitators. Well, as to that, I may state that the 
most disth.guished political agitators that have ever appeared 
during the last hundred years in Ireland are Grattan and 
O'Connell, and I should say that he must either be a very 
stupid or a very base Irishman who would wish to erase the 
achievements of Grattan and O'Connell from the annals of his 
country.' Mr. Bright then proceeded to draw a graphic and 



!6Q IRELAND SFXCE THE UNION 

powerful picture of the sufferings of Ireland and the Irish 
people, and he concluded his gloomy study thus : * Bear in 
mind that I am not speaking of Poland suffering under the 
conquest of Eussia. ... I am not speaking about Hungary, 
or of Venice as she was under the rule of Austria, or of the 
Greeks under the dominion of the Turk, but I am speaking 
of Ireland — part of the United Kingdom — part of that which 
boasts itself to be the most civilised and the most Christian 
nation in the world.' 

Under these conditions Mr. Bright was naturally not sur- 
prised at the statement which he quoted of an esteemed citizen 
of Dublin : ' He told me tliat he believed that a very large 
portion of what is called the poor, amongst Irishmen, sympa- 
thised with any scheme or any proposition that was adverse 
to the Imperial G-overnment.' Then when the thoughts of 
every national Irishman were with his brethren in America, 
Mr. Bright gave this impetus to the Fenian movement. 
' You will recollect that when the ancient Hebrew prophet 
prayed in his captivity he prayed with his window open to- 
wards Jerusalem. You know that the followers of Mahom- 
med, when they pray, turn their faces towards Mecca. When 
the Irish peasant asks for food, and freedom, and blessing, his 
eye follows the setting sun ; the aspirations of his heart reach 
beyond the wide Atlantic, and in spirit he grasps hands with 
the great Repuulic of the West.' 

But Mr. Bright was not merely content with enlarging 
upon the sufferings of Ireland. He saw his way to a remedy 
and boldly enunciated it. ' If Irishmen were united — if your 
105 members were for the most part agreed, you might do 
almost anything you like ; you might do it even in the present 
Parliament ; but if you are disunited, then I know not how 
you can gain anything from a Parliament created as the 
Imperial Parliament is now. The classes who rule in Britain 
will hear your cry as they have heard it before, and will pay 
no attention to it. They will see your people leaving your 
shores, and will think it no calamity to the country. They 
know that they have force to suppress insurrection, and, 



JOHN BILLON AND JOHN JJIllOHT 167 

therefore, you can gain nothing from their fears. What, 
then, is your hope ? It is in a better Parhament, represent- 
ing fairly the United Kingdom — the movement which is now 
in force in England and Scotland, and which is your move- 
ment as much as ours. If there were 100 more members, 
the representatives of large and free constituencies, then your 
cry would be heard, and the people would give you that justice 
which a class has so long denied you.' 

If John Dillon, over whose grave almost Mr. Bright was 
uttering these trumpet-notes of encouragement to the Irish 
people, could have known while he was yet alive that Mr. 
Bright would be the bitterest and most inveterate opponent 
of a body of Irish members who were united, and who were 
agreed, he would, we may feel convinced, have bitterly re- 
gretted that such a change could ever come over such a friend 
of Ireland. 

There is little need to make citations from any further 
speeches of Mr. Bright's, but there is one more which may be re- 
garded as belonging to the John Dillon period. It was spokenin 
Dublin only three nights after the banquet in that city. Mr. 
Bright said : ' I am very sorry that my voice is not what it 
was ; and when I think of the work that is to be done, some- 
times I feel it is a pity we grow old so fast.' We, too, may 
be permitted to regret, nearly twenty years later, that Mr. 
John Bright grew old so fast — that he so soon shook off the 
belief and the courage of his nobler years. For the same 
speech concluded with these words : ' And if I have in past 
times felt an unquenchable sympathy with the sufferings of 
your people, you may rely upon it that if there be an Irish 
member to speak for Ireland, he will find me heartily by his 
side.' Yet there came a time when there were not one but 
many Irish members to speak for Ireland in the English 
House of Commons, and they found Mr. Bright not heartily 
by their side, but zealously, fanatically, opposed to them. 

The Irish people can afford now to forgive, if not to forget, 
the enmity of John Bright. He is now the antagonist of the 
great Englishman who has borne the message of peace and 



168 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

love to Ireland. But because he was once a good friend to 
Ireland, because Ireland believed in him and admired him — 
then for the sake of that belief and that admiration we may 
be content to let him pass by in sorrowful silence. 



CHAPTEE XVL 

THE LAND QUESTION. 

Thkoughout the history of Ireland no question has been so 
fruitful of wretchedness and of conspiracy among the Irish 
people, and of alternate remedial and repressive legislation 
on the part of the English Government, as the question of 
the land. By the incessant confiscations and settlements of 
Irish soil, the land became almost entirely vested in the 
hands of landlords, who, if not alien in blood, were at least 
alien so far as sympathy for their tenants was concerned. 
In fact, the vast proportion of the Irish people were merely 
tenants-at-will of these usurping landlords, the majority of 
whom had no other interest in their lands or their tenants 
than the amount of money which they could extort from them, 
and who were enabled to wring exorbitant rents from the 
wretched peasants to whom the lan<l was an absolute 
necessity, whatever the price paid for its possession. Under 
such conditions it is easily conceivable that often the teims 
demanded were impossible to meet. In such cases the land 
lord had recourse to eviction. Eviction produced misery, and 
misery, disaffection — the disaffection gradually organising 
itself into secret societies and those famous Ribbon lodges, 
which have had such an important connection with the Irish 
Land question. 

In no other civilised country in the world, perhaps, has 
such a system of land tenure existed as existed in Ireland. 
The landlord was absolutely master of his tenant, whom, as 
often as not, he ground down by deputy, living out of the 
country, and merely absorbing the rents. All enterprise and 



THE LAND QUESTION 169 

industry in the Irish peasant were simply at a discount ; for 
any iinprovements which a tenant might efi'cct upon his hold- 
ing, and any increase in the producing power of the land 
which he might contrive, could only result, as he knew but 
too well, in the increase of the rent. Ever since the passing 
of the Union the position of the Irish peasant has constantly 
formed the subject of Parhamentary inquiry and the produc- 
tion of portentous Parliamentary reports. But only too often 
has the matter ended with the report of the Committee of 
Inquiry, without any practical legislation resulting. For a 
long time the only legislation on the subject was directed to 
the punishment and repression of the discontent which such 
a state of things naturally provoked. The greatest concession 
that was ever made was cruelly ironical in its provisions. It 
was an Act prohibiting evictions on Christmas Day and Good 
Friday, and the removal of the roof of a dwelling until the 
inhabitants had left its shelter. 

In the year 1819 the Select Committee presided over by 
Sir John Newton sat to inquire into the matter. Its report 
called attention to the great distress of the needy agricultur- 
alist, and earnestly advocated reform of the land law, and 
suggested the reclamation of land not under cultivation. But 
without avail. In 1823 another Committee reported upon the 
wretchedness of the labouring class, and urged reform as its 
predecessor had done, but again without avail. This report 
was followed in 1825 by a similar report of another Com- 
mittee, which, like the other two, advocated agricultural reform, 
and like the other two, without success. In consequence of 
the Act of 1793 which extended the franchise to the forty- 
shilling freeholder, the landlord, greedy of power, divided his 
estate into a number of small tenancies in order to increase the 
number of votes under his command, and without regard 
to the injuries which -his tenants sustained. Then by the 
Emancipation Act of 1829 the forty- shilling freeholder was 
deprived of the franchise, the landlord's interest in smaller 
holdings was gone, and the system of clearances which ensued 
was carried on again at the expense of the people. 



170 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

In tlie same year as the Emancipation Act, 1829, a Mr. 
Brownlow introduced into the Eiighsh Parhament a Bill for 
facilitating the reclamation of waste lands in Ireland, thereby 
bringing prominently before the Government the wretched 
condition of the tenant-farmer and the agricultural labourer. 
The Commons passed the Bill ; and it was read a second time 
in the Lords ; but the Select Committee to Avhich it was re- 
ferred shelved it for ever. An Arms Bill, however, proposed 
at the same time, though denounced by an English peer as 
vexatious and aggressive, was carried successfully. 

In the year following Mr. Brownlow's futile attempt at 
remedial legislation, Mr. Henry Grattan, the son of the great 
Grattan, in concert with Mr. Spring Eice, who afterwards 
became Lord Monteagle, brought strongly before the attention 
of the Government the wrongs and hardships of the Irish 
peasant, and, like his predecessors, urged the reclamation of 
waste lands. The only outcome of Mr. Grattan's representa- 
tions was the appointment of another Select Committee, 
which reported as the other Committees on the same subject 
had reported, and without any result. 

In 1824 a Select Committee of the House of Commons 
recommended a valuation of the land in Ireland, and after an 
interval of six years this valuation was undertaken, In 1836 
another Act was passed to insure uniform valuation, which 
enacted that the basis of all valuations was to be a fixed scale 
of agricultural produce contained in the Act. The instructions 
to the valuators showed a strong predisposition in favour of the 
landlord, the consequence being that the average valuation 
proved to be about twenty-five per cent, under the gross rental 
of the country. 

In 1814 a Select Committee of the House of Commons was 
appointed. to reconsider the question, with the result that in 
184G an Act was passed changing the principle of valuation 
from a relative valuation of townlands based on a fixed scale 
of agricultural produce, to a tenement valuation for poor-law 
rating to be made ' upon an estimate of the net annual value . . . 
of the rent for which, one year with another, the same might in 



THE LAND QUESTION 171 

its actual state be reasonably expected to let from year to year.' 
The same results, however, practically accrued from the two 
valuations. In 1852 another Valuation Act was passed, in 
which the former system of valuation by a fixed scale of 
agricultural produce was returned to ; but Sir Richard Griffith's 
evidence in 1869 shows the valuation employed was a live-and- 
let-live valuation, according to the state of prices for five 
years previous to the time of valuation. 

In 1830 famine was abroad and riot was rampant. It 
is curious to note that in the speech from the throne the 
King, while declaring that he was determined to crush out 
sedition and disaffection by all the means which the law and 
the constitution placed at his disposal, had no remedy for the 
poverty and distress which had bred the disaffection. The 
Ministry were attacked at this time by Mr. Hume, who de- 
nounced them for having violated by their coercive policy the 
promises which they made while in Opposition of a concilia- 
tory policy towards Ireland. In 1831 Lord Althorpe proposed 
and carried a vote for 50,000/. to be advanced to Ihe Commis- 
sioners for expenditure on public works in Ireland. The effect 
of this measure was, however, entirely negatived by the Arms 
Bill, w^hich was introduced four months later by Mr. Stanley, 
and which Lord Althorpe stigmatised as one of the most 
tyrannical n \isures he had ever heard proposed. 

An Act dealing with the question of sub-letting, prohibit- 
ing the letting by the lessee unless with the express permission 
of the proprietor, was now before the House. It w^as attacked 
by Dr. Boyle, who maintained that it was mere fatuity to ex- 
pect the Irish peasants to submit tamely to eviction so long as 
their only means of li\ eliliood depended upon the possession 
of their potato field. Though the Catholic Emancipation Act 
liad removed the disabilities of representation from Catholics, 
yet it had also abolished the forty-shilling vote, and thus gave 
the landlords greater opportunities for clearance. The con- 
sequence was that the condition of Ireland was desperate to 
the last degree. 

This terrible state of things was, as usual, met by the 



172 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Grovernment with a fresh Coercion Bill. In 1834, indeed, an 
effort to do something for the Irish tenant was made by Mr. 
Poulett Scrope, but unsuccessfully ; and in the following year 
Mr. Sharman Crawford, then member for Dundalk, moved for 
leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to landlord 
and tenant. He reintroduced his measure in March 1836, 
obtained permission to bring in his Bill, and there the matter 
ended. He was followed, in 1837, by Mr. Lynch, who moved 
for permission to introduce a Bill on waste lands, but who met 
with the same amount of success as Mr. Sharman Crawford. 

The first measure of real remedial value was the Artificial 
Drainage Act, passed in 1842, which did something towards 
reclaiming waste land, but which, until reinforced by the 
Summary Proceedings Act, v\ is of small value. The year 
1843 was a memorable one in the history of the Irish Land 
question, for it was then that, in response to the repeated 
nnportunings of Mr. Sharman Crawford, Sir Eobert Peel 
appointed the famous Devon Commission. This Commission 
sat for two years, and at the end of its investigations reported, 
as all other Committees of Inquiry had reported, that the 
disastrous relations of landlord to tenant were the direct cause 
of all the poverty and suffering under which the Irish peasant 
laboured ; and advised legislatioD which would secure to the 
tenant a just compensation for outlay of capital and labour. 

Lord Devon, who was determined to secure some practical 
results to the inquiries of the Commission, if it were possible, 
on May 6, 1845, printed a number of petitions, in which he 
urged Parliament to assure to the industrious tenant the 
results and benefits of the improvements which he effected. 
In response to those appeals a Bill was brought in in the 
June of the same year by Lord Stanley, providing for com- 
pensation for disturbance. Owing to the violent opposition 
with which the Bill was encountered by Lords, Commons, 
and the Select Committee to whom it had been referred. 
Lord Stanley had to abandon it in the following month. 

Mr. Sharman Crawford now introduced a Tenant-Eight 
Bill which he had held back in 1843 in order to await the 



THE LAND QUESTION 173 

report of the Devon Commission. In 1846 a Bill brought 
forward by Lord Lincoln, prompted by Mr. Sharman Craw- 
ford, dealing v/itli compensation for disturbance, passed the 
second reading, and then was lost sight of by the resignation 
of the Ministry. Mr. Sharman Crawford's Tenant-Eight Bill 
was finally rejected on June 10, 1847, by a majority of eighty- 
seven ; but it was brought forward again in the following year, 
and this time the adverse majority was reduced to twenty-three. 

In 1848 a Bill, practically the same as that of Lord 
Lincoln's, which was lost in 1846, was introduced by the 
Irish Secretary, Sir William Somerville. It received the 
support of the Irish members ; but the report upon the Bill 
was not prepared until too close to the end of the session for 
any further progress to be made ; so, in order that the Irish 
people might not be disappointed by an absence of legislation, 
the Government suspended the Habeas Corpus Act. 

In 1849 Mr. Horsman pleaded powerfully, but unsuccess- 
fully, for the presentation of an address to Her Majesty, 
pointing out the condition of her Irish subjects. Sir William 
Somerville, early in the following year, reintroduced his Bill, 
which passed the second reading, was consigned to a Com- 
mittee, and shelved, while Mr. Sharman Crawford again 
brought forward his Tenant-Right Bill, and again was 
defeated. 

In 1851 a motion made by Sir H. W. Barron for a 
Committee of the whole House to inquire into the condition 
of Ireland, was lost by a majority of nine ; and thus, though 
six years had elapsed, nothing had been done for Ireland 
since the report of the Devon Commission, except the En- 
cumbered Estates Act, which was passed in the interest of 
the landlords. 

On February 10, Mr. Sharman Crawford obtained leave to 
bring in a Bill to regulate the Ulster custom. But at this 
point the Liberal Government was ousted and supplanted by 
Lord Derby's administration, and Mr. Crawford's Bill was lost 
by a majority of 110. The new Government was not entirely 
supine on the Irish question, and the Irish Attorney- General, 



174 IRELAND SINCE TtEE UNION 

Mr. Napier, drafted four Bills all bearing on the relations of 
landlord to tenant — a Land Improvement Bill, a Landlord 
and Tenant Law Consolidation Bill, a Leasing Powers Bill, 
and a Tenants' Improvements Compensation Bill. 

In 1853 a Committee was appointed to consider these four 
Bills in conjunction with Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill. It 
rejected the latter, and considerably modified, at the expense 
of the tenant, Mr. Napier's Compensation for Improvements 
Bill. Meanwhile the Government had again been vested in 
the hands of the Liberals, and although Mr. Napier, now in 
opposition, continued to give his strongest support to the Bills 
which he had introduced, the Tory party fought them tooth 
and nail. 

In 1854 the Select Committee of the House of Lords, ap- 
pointed to consider these Bills, condemned the Tenants' Com- 
pensation Bill, and only the other three were returned to the 
House of Commons. In the following year the Government 
adopted a Bill which Mr. Serjeant Shee endeavoured to bring 
in, and which was substantially identical with that Bill of 
Mr. Napier's which the Lords had rejected. The opposition 
of the land-owning class, however, was so violent that the 
Bill had to be abandoned. 

In 1856 Mr. George Henry Moore, the leader of the Irish 
Parliamentary party, took up again Mr. Sharman Crawford's 
Tenant-Eight Bill ; but the opposition which it encountered 
from the Government was fatal to it. Mr. Moore reintroduced 
it in the following year, only to abandon it again. 

In 1858 Mr. John Francis Maguire, who had succeeded to 
the leadership of the Irish party, again brought forward Mr. 
Serjeant Shee's Tenant Compensation Bill, but was defeated 
by a majority of forty-five. Though the Government displayed 
much apathy in remedying the grievances of their Irish fellow- 
subjects, they showed much more consideration for the Ben- 
galee. They had just settled the Bengal Land question on 
the ancient principles of Indian law, thereby granting to the 
Indian subject much that was denied to the Irish subject. 

At last, in 1860 was passed the famous Land Act, which 



THE LAND QUFSTTON- 175 

proved so unsatisfactory. This Act attempted to simplify the 
relations between landlord and tenant by sweeping away all 
the remains of the feudal connection, and by establishing an 
absolute principle of free trade and freedom of contract as 
opposed to tenure. But the principle of freedom of contract 
is wholly unsuited to the Irish Land question, and in so much 
as it was based upon this principle the Act was a failure. The 
tenants are compelled to take the land, often without any ^to- 
spect of fulfilling their contract, because all other means of 
hvelihood have been destroyed. The best terms they can 
make are practically those which the landlord chooses to im- 
pose. It is exactly the same principle as the State regulation 
of railway fares. Freedom of contract is not permitted in 
this case, because the passenger and the railway company are 
not free contracting parties. The latter holds a monopoly of 
what is practically a necessity to the former ; and without 
State interference the passenger would have to submit to any 
charges the company thought fit to impose. The immediate 
effect of the Act was to produce an immense flood of emigra- 
tion and to give rise to the Fenian conspiracy. 

In 1866 a Bill brought in by Mr. Chichester Fortescue, 
to amend that of 1860, fell through, and in 1867 a like fate 
befell a Tory measure drawn up much on the lines of Lord 
Stanley's Bill of 1845. 

Mr. Gladstone came into office in 1868, and early in 
1870 introduced the only really beneficial measure since 
the report of the Devon Commission — the Bill to amend 
the Law of Landlord and Tenant in Ireland. But, though 
this Bill conceded to the tenant the privilege of litigation with 
his landlord, this really did not place him beyond the land- 
lord's control, for the day went generally to the man who 
could hold out longest. The three objects of the Land Act 
of 1870 were to obtain for the Irish tenant security of tenure ; 
to encourage the making of improvements ; and the creation 
of a peasant proprietorship. With tenancies held under the 
Ulster tenant-right custom the Act did not interfere, but 
merely enforced the custom against the landlords of estates 



176 IBELANB SINCE THE UNION 

subject to it. The two chief features of this Ulster custom — so 
long and so greatly coveted by the Irish peasants of the other 
provinces — were permissive fixity of tenure, and the tenant's 
right to sell the good- will of his farm. 

Those who drew up the Act of 1870 dare not affirm that 
its object was the creation of a peasant proprietorship- -and, 
indeed, it was often denied that such was the object — or to 
give him any portion of absolute ownership. Its effect was 
stated as compelling bad landlords to act lilie good landlords ; 
but wdiat it really did was to make eviction too costly for any 
but the wealthier land-owners. Its provisions for compensa- 
tion for disturbance were ineffectual, and the eight clauses 
attempting to create a peasant proprietorship were also futile.' 
' The cause of their failure is obvious,' says Mr. Richey, ' to 
anyone acquainted with the nature of the landed estates title 
which it was considered desirable for the tenant to obtain. A 
Landed Estates Court conveyance affects not only the parties 
to the proceedings, but binds persons, whether parties or not, 
and extinguishes all rights which are inconsistent with the 
terms of the grant of the Court. If by any mistake more 
lands than should properly be sold be included in the grant, 
or the most indisputable rights of third parties are not noticed 
in the body of the grant or the annexed schedule, irreparable 
injustice is done, and the injured parties have no redress.' 
The fact that the Court was not made the instrument for the 
perpetration of the grossest frauds is due solely to the stringency 
of its rules and the intelligence of its officers. Such was the 
condition of things that the Land Act of 1880 was schemed 
to ameliorate. 



177 

CHAPTER XVII. 

FENIANISM. 

The suppression of the Phoenix movement stimulated, instead 
of retarding, the spirit of secret organisation in Ireland and in 
America. Stephens was not disheartened bv a temporary 
defeat. The process of agitation, of enrolment, of organisa- 
tion, went on with greater vigour than ever. And the new 
body was imbued with far greater vitality than the Phoenix 
conspiracy ever possessed, or had seemed likely to possess. 
Stephens in Ireland, and O'Mahony in America, were both 
working steadily for the same ends ; and the result of their 
efforts was the Fenian organisation. 

The title of the Fenian Brotherhood was not the title by 
which at first the body was known in Ireland. Stephens 
called the association of which he was the presiding genius 
the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and for a time the letters 
I.R.B. represented to Irish conspirators the name of their 
conspiracy. But O'Mahony, over in America, was something 
of a Gaelic scholar and student. He desired to give the 
organisation for which he was working a name which should 
recall some great historical association connected with the past 
glories of Ireland, and cast about in his mind for a suitable 
appellation. He bethought him of that wonderful semi- 
mythic chivalry of the Feni, companions of Fionn, the son of 
Coul, whose deeds were the pride and the marvel of pre- 
historic Irish liistory. From this legendary brotherhood of 
warriors and poets and heroes — warriors like Fionn himself, 
poets like Oisin and heroes like Diarmuid, the lover of Grainne 
— he borrowed their stately title to give it to the very real 
brotherhood of which he was, in a measure, the head. Thus, 
from the poetic fancy of the exiled Young Irelander, the 
most formidable of Irish conspiracies got its name of the 
Fenian Brotherhood. 

The title was an attractive one. It was easy to remember, 

N 



178 J BEL AN B SINCE THE UNION 

It roused famous and fascinating associations, and it soon 
over-crowed the colder name devised by Stephens ; till, in the 
end, the Fenians became the generally accepted designation 
of the world for the members of the I.K.B. The name passed 
at once into literature. It lives in passionate poems and 
stirring lyrics, in which the lengthy appellation of the Irish 
Republican Brotherhood could have found no place. The 
well-known poem, with its stirring refrain of ' Up and make 
way for the Fenian men,' would in itself be enough to fix and 
make permanent the title of any movement. The Tyrtaeus of 
the latest of Irish conspiracies found his account in tlie term 
taken from the shadowy heroes of Irish antiquity. The Irish 
Eepublican Brotherhood might serve very well in eloquent 
speeches and elaborate addresses, but the Fenians was the 
term for poets. 

The movement went on slowdy but very surely. It re- 
ceived perhaps the most important of its earlier impulses with 
the funeral of Terence Bellew M'Manus. M'Manus had died 
away in America in exile. Fortune had not smiled upon him 
since the days when Meagher described him as the ' tall, 
dashing, soldierly fellow, with frank, bold, honest features, 
flushing with delight,' who, with a green cap on his head 
and a rifle in his right hand, joined the rebel muster at Ballin- 
garry. He made his escape from his Australasian prison in 
1851. 'Having been arrested,' says Gavan Duffy, 'by an 
excess of authority, for some supposed violation of convict 
regulations, he appealed to a bench of magistrates, and was 
set at liberty. Being thus free from any obligation to his 
jailers, he made his escape to San Francisco.' In California 
M'Manus's closing years were passed not too happily. He 
entered upon his old business. But the business habits of the 
New World, and especially of that very New World of Cali- 
fornia in those days, were not the business habits of the Old ; 
and Terence Bellew M'Manus found it difficult for him to 
reconcile his own principles and theories with the rough-and- 
ready methods of that terra nova, the California of the Pioneers 
and of Bret Harte's ' argonauts.' 



FENIANISM 179 

We are told that heavy shadows came to linger on the 
handsome face which once was all smiles and brightness. He 
lived poor, and he died poor in 1861. His family and his 
friends resolved that his body should be laid in the country he 
had loved so well, and for which he had sacrificed so much. 
The remains of the brave, brilliant, and gifted Young Irelander 
were conveyed in their coffin across the Atlantic, and were 
borne in solemn state through Dublin, to their final resting- 
place in Glasnevin, amidst the silent homage of assembled 
thousands. 

'The incident,' says Mr. A. M. Sullivan, 'was so dramatic 
and touched such deep emotions, that the proceeding assumed 
a magnitude and solemnity which astonished and startled 
everyone. The Irish race in America seemed to make of the 
funeral a demonstration of devotion to the old land. The 
Irish at home were seized with like feelings, and on all sides 
prepared to give a suitable reception to the remains of him 
who, proscribed in life, might return only in death to the 
land he loved. It was a proceeding which appealed power- 
fully to the sympathies of the people ; and Nationalists of all 
hues and sections mingled in the homage and patriotism 
which it was understood to convey.' 

Another writer gives an interesting account of the pas- 
sage of the funeral cortege through Dublin : ' Every spot 
that could call up a vengeful memory was included ; no turn- 
ing was neglected from which a silent bravado couU 'je flung 
at the Government. It proceeded through Thomas Street, 
indissolubly associated with the memory of Lord Edward Fitz- 
gerald, every head uncovering as it passed the house where 
that nobleman met his death, and the church where he was 
interred. A third, the most striking pause of all, was made 
at the scene of Emmet's execution. ... A similar mark of 
respect was accorded to a house in High Street, where the 
remains of Wolfe Tone had been deposited previous to their 
removal to their last resting-place. In passing the Castle 
.the procession slackened i's pace to the utmost, and Hngered 
on its way in silent, but stern defiance. Then it took its 

n2 



180 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

course by the Exchange, through College Green, and in front 
of the Parliament Houses. Thence it wound through West- 
moreland Street to Carlisle Bridge, and so to Glasnevin. 
The pall- bearers themselves were members of the Irish 
Republican Brotherhood.' 

An immense number of recruits came into the Fenian 
ranks after the M'Manus funeral. During the six months 
which followed that memorable event the organisation is said 
to have no less than doubled its numbers in Ireland. One 
addition to the ranks could well have been spared. This was 
Pierce Nagle, who afterwards became so conspicuous and so 
infamous as the informar. A large number of American 
Fenians, too, came over with the body of M'Manus, and their 
presence in Dublin served to link very closely the kindred 
organisations of Ireland and America, and to encourage and 
stimulate the Irish agitation. 

One very remarkable event which followed close upon the 
M'Manus funeral was a meeting that w^as held in the Rotunda 
in Dublin, to express sympathy with the American Federals. 
The meeting, which was ingeniously organised by members of 
the Fenian body, was addressed by one very peculiar patriot, 
and the chair was taken by another. The speaker was the 
late Mr. P. J. Smyth ; the chairman was The O'Donoghue. 
At that time The O'Donoghue was an advocate of advanced 
nationalism, a point of view to which he again oscillated 
for a short time lately. It is interesting to read an account 
of the speech which Mr. P. J. Smyth, whose memory has 
been a good deal glorified by the Conservative Press, addressed 
to the meeting on that occasion : 

' Having read the resolution which he was called upon to 
move, Mr. Smyth made a speech which abounded in sneers 
against England. The tone of his voice was pitched and his 
accent carefully suited to convey his meaning. He said that 
an insult had been offered to " our " flag -thereby capping the 
denial made shortly before by the chairman, that Irishmen 
accepted the flag of England as their own. He alluded to the 
mere Yankee captain, who was not of noble blood, but who, 



FENIANTSM IS! 

for all that, dared to fire a shot across the bows of a right- 
royal 5n'i(is/i steamer, although she was " under the flag that 
had braved a thousand years the battle and the breeze," thus 
forgetting that'* Britons never failed," &c., and altogether re- 
gardless of the British captain, his storming, his swearing, and 
his exposition of British international law. After more of 
this kind of thing — the word British figuring in every sneering- 
sentence — the speaker went on to observe that England had 
got up indignation meetings, but that Irishmen knew how to 
be indignant too. Here he looked round him with a peculiar 
expression. The look was understood, and elicited a storm 
of applause. Then came a panegyric on America, which in- 
troduced and strengthened the diatribe that followed against 
England, " the nation that had levelled their homes, banished 
them and scattered them as outcasts through the earth, and 
denied them the ordinary rights of mankind — even at that 
very hour forbidding Irishmen to bear arms. Thus," added 
Mr. Smyth, should Irishmen read the characters of the 
antagonists (England and America), " the one the best friend 
of Ireland, the other her inveterate enemy," and act accordingly. 
How the speaker expected his countrymen to act in case 
of war between the two countries, he showed a little later. 
When speaking of those already in the field on both sides in 
America, he declared that the moment England entered into 
a war with America, they (the Irishmen serving the North 
and the South) would forget all past differences and be ar- 
rayed against England. The speech closed with an enumera- 
tion of the difficulties and dangers threatening England, 
which drew forth reiterated cheers.' This was not the kind 
of speech which Mr. P. J. Smyth was accustomed to make in 
later years, when he had become first the panegyrist, and 
then the placeman of the Government he denounced. 

The American civil war was a great nourisher of the Fenian 
movement. Thousands upon thousands of Irishmen fought 
upon either side in the great American Iliad. Whether under 
the Stars and Stripes or beneath the Stars and Bars, whether 
io the tune of * The Bonny Blue Flag ' or the still more 



182 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

menacing music of * John Brown's Body,' vast numbers of 
Irishmen learnt the trade of war in one of its grimmest and 
sternest schools ; learnt the familiar use of arms ; learnt 
something of strategy ; learnt, too, the art of commanding, 
and the more difficult art of obeying ; and became familiar 
with all the duties and dangers of a soldier's life. When the 
war was over, it left many thousands of Irishmen dead on 
many desperate fields. 

', Of the Irish Brigade that followed Meagher so gallantly 
up the heights of Fredericksburg, few came back to tell the 
story of their wild charges under their beloved leader. In the 
ranks of the Confederate army Irishmen fought and died by 
the hundred and the tens of hundreds. But on either side, 
whether in the blue uniform of the Federal or the grey cloth 
of the Secessionist, the Irish soldier remained first of all an 
Irishman. There is a touching story told of one battle in 
which a Federal Irish regiment found itself opposed to an 
Irish regiment on the Confederate side, and of how the two 
regiments refused to join battle, and passed each other with 
mutual cries of ' God save Ireland! ' Of such men as this 
the war left a goodly multitude, well-trained, well-seasoned, 
well-schooled in the use of arms. Such were the men whom 
the planners and promoters of the Fenian movement relied 
upon to make that movement triumphant. 

The chiefs of the movement felt the time was approaching 
for the long-dreamed-of rising. A large amount of money 
was subscribed, and sent over to Stephens to be expended for 
the good of the cause. A little cloud of Irish -American 
officers, men who had served on both sides in the war, de- 
scended upon Ireland to organise the country, and act as heads 
of the rebellion. The preparations, however, in Ireland were 
not in a very advanced state, and the Irish-American officers 
found in most cases that very little was ready ; that there were 
very few men for them to take command of ; that there was 
little or nothing for them to do ; and that their presence was 
rapidly arousing suspicions in the minds of the English 
Government. An attempt on Canada, which was, perhaps, 



FENIANISM 18H 

one of the most hopeful of the Fenian schemes, fell through 
for want of proper management, and practically came to 
nothing. 

Three men were conspicuous conspirators and followers of 
Stephens in the Fenian movement. These were Charles J. 
Kickham, John O'Leary, and Thomas Clarke Luby. Charles 
Kickham was a Tipperary man, intensely popular with the 
people of his own county. He had been intended for the 
medical profession, but an unhappy accident prevented him 
from ever hoping for success in such a career. He was a 
passionate sportsman ; and one day, after returning from a 
long day's shooting in the hills, he was drying some wet 
powder before the fire, when a spark fell from the embers, and 
the powder exploded in Kickham's face. It was feared at first 
that he would lose his sight altogether ; and when he had re- 
covered, both sight and hearing were terribly injured. This 
misfortune, which only deepened the affection of the people, 
led him to devote his life to the study of literature. He wrote 
some charming stories, and some exquisite verses. He was 
an intense Nationalist, and when the Fenian movement first 
began to take shape in Ireland, he became an active member 
of the body. 

In November 1860 some twenty-eight Tipperary men, who 
had formed part of the Irish brigade for the defence of the 
Pope, gave a public reception at Mullinahone, Kickham's 
native place, at which Kickham made a speech, and read an 
address to the friends of Ireland, signed by the twenty-eight 
members of the Papal brigade, and said to have been writ- 
ten by Kickham. In this address the signatories declared : 
' We wish to let the world know that we are slaves, but not 
contented slaves. . . . We protest against this intolerable 
tyranny, and denounce to the world the hypocrisy of England 
in pretending to be the friend of freedom and oppressed nation- 
alities.' Kickham made a speech after the address was read, 
which he concluded with some words which showed clearly 
enough his impassioned sympathy for the new agitation. * I 
heard people say that the brigade men should be asked to 



184 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

scatter the seed during the spring, as in that case the harvest 
would surely be good. I hope they will scatter another kind 
of seed, broadcast too, and it will grow and ripen.' 

The second of Stephens' supporters was John O'Leary. 
' John O'Leary,' says Mr. A. M. Sullivan, ' was unquestion- 
ably one of the ablest and most remarkable men in the con- 
spiracy. Intellectually and politically he was of the type of 
V/olfe Tone, Robert Emmet, and John Mitchel. . . . He was 
born in Tipperary town, and inherited on the death of his 
parents, for his share, a small property of some 300Z. or 400Z. 
a year. He was a graduate of the Queen's University, having 
taken out his medical degree in the Queen's College, Cork. 
He resided for some time in Paris, where his mind, his tastes, 
his manners, opinions, and principles, received impress and 
shape discernible in his subsequent career. He also visited 
America, and there formed the acquaintance of the men who 
were planning and davising the Fenian movement. He was 
a man of culture, and of considerable literary abilities. . . . 
He was reserved, sententious, almost cynical ; keenly obser- 
vant, sharply critical, full of restrained passion.' We believe 
that we are right in saying that Mr. O'Leary himsalf has 
stated that he never was a member of the Irish Eepublican 
Brotherhood. 

The third of Stephens' ablest lieutenants was Thomas C. 
Luby. Luby, like Kickham, was a Tipperary man ; like some 
of the most prominent of the leaders of 1798, he was a Protes- 
tant. Though he was a very young man when the movement 
of 1848 was going on, he had devoted himself to it, and had 
attached himself to the advanced section of the Young Irelan- 
ders who followed the lead of John Mitchel. He had come 
from Melbourne to France to join Stephens and O'Mahony, and 
he accompanied Stephens on the tour through Ireland that 
preceded the formation of the Phoenix conspiracy. Later on 
he became one of the editors of the Irish Tribune, a national 
newspaper which lived for a short time, and which preceded 
the Irishman. ' His politics,' says Mr. A. T^I. Sullivan, ' were 
a great affliction to his relatives, who were in a position to 



FENIANISM 185 

advance him, and who would have done so if he would but 
give up such dangerous doctrines. He preferred to struggle 
on for himself, holding by his principles, such as they were. 
This course he pursued unfalteringly to the last.' 

Disaster after disaster came upon the Fenian movement. 
The best opportunity for a rising was in 1865, but the opportu- 
nity was lost. The history of other Irish insurrectionary pro- 
jects repeated itself. In 1848 the followers of Mitch el appear to 
have imagined that the Government they were openly defying 
would forbear and hold its hand until all the plans and pre- 
parations of the insurgent party were perfected. Something 
of the same impression would seem to have influenced the 
councils and the actions of the Fenian leaders. Stephens 
established the Irish People newspaper, which numbered on 
its staff some of his best lieutenants, and the Irish People 
played much the same part in the history of the Fenian move- 
ment which the United Irishman played in the history of 
Young Ireland. 

The Government allowed the Irish People to carry on its 
existence unimpeded up to a certain point. Then, suddenly, 
when Stephens and his friends were unprepared and unaware, 
it struck and struck sharply. As usual the hands of the 
Government were greatly strengthened by treachery in the 
ranks of their opponents. There was a man in the service of 
the Irish People, and in the confidence of Stephens, named 
Pierce Nagle. This man was a Government spy who made 
himself a profitable livelihood by retailing to the Castle 
authorities all the infoimution he could get — and he had ex- 
cellent opportunities of getting such information — about the 
plans of the Fenian leaders. In September, 1865, Nagle stole 
from one of Stephens' emissaries a letter from the head-centre 
to members of the movement in Tipperary. This letter he 
sent after some delay to the Castle, where a study of its con- 
tents showed the Executive that the plans of the Fenians were 
rapidly advancing, and that the Government must strike at 
once if it wished to strike in time. The letter in question 
ran thus ; 



186 IBELAISD SINCE THE UNION 

* Dublin, September 8, 1865 

'Brothers, — I regret to find the letter I addressed to you 
has never reached you. Had you received it I am confident 
all would have been right before this ; because I told you ex- 
plicitly what to do,,, and once you saw your way it is sure to 
me that you would have done it well. As far as I can under- 
stLind your actual position and wishes now, the best course to 
take is to get all the working B.'s together, and after due 
deliberation and without favour to any one — acting purely and 
conscientiously for the good of the cause — to select one man 
to represent and direct you all. This selection made, the man 
of your choice should come up here at once, when he shall 
get instructions and authority to go on with the good work. 
There is no time to be lost. This year — and let there be no 
mistake about it — must be the year of action. I speak with 
a knowledge and authority to which no other man could pre- 
tend ; and I repeat, the flag of Ireland — of the Irish Eepublic 
— must this year be raised. As I am much pressed for time, 
I shall merely add that it shall be raised in a glow of hope 
such as never gleamed round it before. Be, then, of firm 
faith and the best of cheer, for it all goes bravely on. — Yours 
fraternally, 

* J. POWEE. 

' N.B. — This letter must be read for the working B.'s only 
and when read must be burnt.' 

With such a document in their possession, the Executive 
felt confident of convicting its enemies, and it made its raid. 
On September 15 a police descent was made upon the offices 
of the Irish Peoijle ; all the copies of the journal found there- 
in were seized and conveyed to the Castle ; and within a few 
hours all the more prominent Fenians were captured at their 
dweihngs and secured in prison. All with one important ex- 
ception. The head -centre himself, James Stephens, was not 
to be found. The Government had in their power all his 
principal lieutenants, but without Stephens their work was 
hardly half done. Fenianism, to the eye of authority, was 



FENIANISM 187 

criisliable if Stephens were captured ; with Stephens at hberty 
little or nothing had been accompHshed. 

There was the most intense excitement in DubHn when it 
became known that the Government had struck with all its 
force at the Fenian organisation ; the excitement was in- 
creased an hundredfold by the news that Stephens was free 
and unfindable. For some hours it was feared that the 
arrests would be the signal for an armed rising. But the 
utmost precautions were taken by the Government. All over 
Ireland prominent Fenians were seized upon ; all over Ireland 
forces of military and constabulary were held in readiness to 
meet any attempt at insurrection. Stephens was, indeed, a 
free man, but for the moment his movement was checkmated. 
It was perfectly easy for the Government to obtain convictions 
against the men in their power. When Luby was arrested a 
document was found among his papers, which was the most 
magnificent ' find ' for the Government, and was in itself 
enough for their purpose. It was a paper written by the 
head-centre entrusting his authority to a triumvirate of his 
most trusted friends : 

* I hereby empower Thomas Clarke Luby, John O'Leary, 
and Charles J. Kickham a Committee of Organisation or 
Executive, with the same supreme control over the home 
organisation, England, Ireland, and Scotland, that I have 
exercised luyself. I further empower them to appoint a 
Committee of Military Inspection and a Committee of Appeal 
and Judgment, the functions of which Committee will be 
made known to every member of them. Trusting to the 
patriotism and abilities of the Executive I fully endorse their 
actions beforehand. I call on every man in our ranks to 
support and be guided by them in all that concerns the 
military brotherhood. 

* J. Stephens.' 

Even without such a document, however, the Government 
tad on their side all the evidence they desired. Their trusty 



188 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

spy, Nagle, had been arrested, for form's sake, along with his 
deluded comrades, and for some days he kept up his character 
as a Fenian prisoner. As soon as he was wanted, however, 
he exchanged the cell for the witness-box, and made his 
appearance as the inevitable informer to give Queen's evidence 
against the men who had believed in him. 

In the meantime the Dublin police were racking their 
brains to discover the whereabouts of Stephens. It was not 
until November that they learned that the man whose capture 
they so eagerly desired was, and had been, within their grasp 
all the time since their raid upon the offi^^e of the Irish People. 
In a peaceful unsuspected gentleman, with a taste for garden- 
ing in a mild way, living in the suburbs of Dublin — Mr. 
Herbert, of Fairfield House, Sandymount — the police at last 
discovered the long-lost head-centre. 

On Saturday, November 11, 1865, Fairfield House was 
surrounded by a strong force of police, and Stephens was 
arrested at last. With him were captured Charles J. Kick- 
ham, Hugh Brophy, and Edward Duffy, who has been called 
the life and soul of the Fenian movement west of the Shannon. 
A vast mass of important documents were seized at the same 
time. An exultant Executive was now convinced that all 
further danger from the dreaded organisation was over for 
good and all. In Ireland, in England, in America, and, 
indeed, all over the civilised world, the tidings of the capture 
of the famous head-centre were received with intense excite- 
ment. But the excitement occasioned by the capture of 
Stephens was as nothing when contrasted with the excite- 
ment caused by a piece of news which followed close upon 
it — the news of Stephens' escape. 

Stephens' escape ! The escape of the head-centre of the 
Fenian conspiracy from the hands that had caught him at 
last, after seeking for him so long and so eagerly in vain ! 
The escape of the Government's most valuable prisoner from 
one of the strongest of Government prisons ! The escape of 
James Stephens within exactly a fortnight of his capture ! 
It seemed incredible, but it was true, nevertheless. On 



rENHyiS.U 189 

Saturday, November 11, the police laid hands on Stephens; 
on Saturday, the 25th, he had slipped through their fingers 
and was free again, out of their power and wholly vanished. 
' The earth has bubbles as the water has, and he is of them,' 
the perplexed Lord Lieutenant might well have said, with 
Macbeth, when he learned of the astonishing disappearance 
of his prize. 

Nothing in the whole history of wonderful escapes from 
durance, from Benvenuto Cellini or Casanova to Latude, is 
more remarkable than the escape of Stephens. The prison- 
breaking feats recorded of English Sheppard or French 
Cartouche sink into insignificance beside it. The dearest 
captive that Castle authority could have closely shut in its 
surest stronghold had passed out of its power as easily as if 
bolts and bars were things of air, and massive walls mere 
film or gossamer. Stephens might well have boasted, more 
literally than the poet Lovelace, that ' stone walls do not a 
prison make nor iron bars a cage.' He was gone, no one 
in authority knew how, and left not a trace behind. Then 
came such a mounting and riding for such a hunt as had 
not been run in Ireland since the days of ninety-eight. But 
not all the king's horses nor all the king's men could get 
James Stephens within the grip of the law again. He hid 
safely for a wliile in the vicinity of Dublin, and then made 
good his escape to France. 

The escape of Stephens seemed little short of miraculous, 
at the time. We know now that Fenianism had made its way 
within the walls of Richmond Prison. If the Government had 
their servants in the ranks of the Fenians, the Fenian oath 
bound many who were apparently in the service of the 
Government. Two of these, it is said, were warders in Rich- 
mond Prison, and it was by their aid that Stephens' escape was 
effected. It may be that the knowledge of this fact was in 
the mind of Stephens when, at his examination on November 
15, he boldly declared that he ' defied and despised any punish- 
ment that British law could inflict upon him.' The words 
seemed idle breath when they were uttered ; their meaning 



190 in ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

was understood on the wild, wet morning when Dublin woke 
up to find that Stephens was once again at liberty. 

But if Stephens was gone, the E xecutive had other 
prisoners, and could deal with them. Luby and O'Leary were 
sentenced to penal servitude for twenty years ; O'Donovan 
Rossa to penal servitude for life. There were more and more 
arrests, more and more convictions ; blow after blow was 
dealt at the Fenian organisation ; internal quarrels, too, 
weakened it. But it still existed, still held together ; the 
dread of a rising was almost daily present to the mind of 
authority in 1866. Well it might be present. Over across 
the Atlantic wild work had begun. The Fenians in America 
invaded Canada on the 31st of May, 1866, and enjoyed for 
some brief hours the honour of victory. They occupied Fort 
Erie ; they defeated the Canadian Volunteers who came 
against them ; they captured some English flags, and saw 
their own green banner floating over a captured position in 
British territory. But the United States, which under other 
conditions might have been willing enough to hold aloof if not 
to facilitate the invasion, interfered to enforce the neutrality of 
the frontier, arrested most of the Fenian leaders, and extin- 
guished the invasion. 

Another daring attempt was actually made some time 
later on English soil. Some of the Fenians in England 
planned the capture of Chester Castle. The scheme was to 
seize the arms in the Castle, to hasten on at once to Holy- 
head, to take possession of such steamers as might be there, 
to cut the telegraphic communication between the islands, 
and invade Ireland before the authorities could be prepared 
for the blow. Once in Ireland, the pressure of such a force 
would facilitate the general rising, and anything might be 
hoped for. The plan was daring and ingenious, but it was 
betrayed by the informer Cory don, and came to nothing. 

At last the general rising in Ireland, which had been so 
long expected, came in the early months of 1867. It was 
premature, abortive ; but, while it lasted, desperate. Through 
Corydon and their other informers the Government were ac* 



FENTANTSM 191 

quainted with most of tlie Fenian plans, and were able to 
meet them at almost every point. Everything seemed against 
the insurrection : the very elements fought against it. Snow, 
that rare accompaniment of winter in the mild climate of 
Ireland, fell incessantly during those stormy March days 
of 1867, and practically buried the rising in its white 
shroud. 

The last struggle of the Fenian insurrection of 1867 was 
made in England, and that last struggle forms the saddest 
chapter in the whole story. Soon after the rising in Ireland 
the Manchester police arrested on suspicion two men. The 
prisoners proved to be Colonel Thomas J. Kelly, who had 
taken a conspicuous part in tlis leadership of the Fenian 
movement after Stsphens' arrest and escape, and Captain 
Deasy, another prominent Fenian. Their seizure was a great 
gain to the Government and a great blow to the Fenians. 
The members of the organisation in Manchester met together 
and resolved upon a bold attempt to rescue their captive 
leaders. A body of men were told off for the purpose. As 
usual, some inkling of the Fenian purpose reached the 
Government, and some precautions were taken by the Man- 
chester authorities. 

On Wednesday, the 18th of September, Kelly and Deasy 
were removed in the prison van from the court to be taken to 
the county jail at Salford. The prisoners were handcuffed in 
separate compartments of the van ; a guard of twelve police- 
men accompanied it. On the road the van was stopped by a 
body of armed Fenians, who drove off most of the police and 
attempted to break it open. The policeman inside the 
van. Sergeant Brett, refused to surrender the keys, and the 
Fenians, driven by time, and dreading reinforcements for the 
police, resorted to the familiar expedient of blowing open the 
lock with a pistol shot. The shot thus fired accidentally and 
mortally wounded Brett. One of the women prisoners in- 
side the van took the keys from the dying man's pocket and 
handed them out to the rescuing party. The van was then 
opened, entered, KeUy and Deasy were brought out, and 



192 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

heavily manacled as they were, were hurried away by some 
of their rescuers. 

While all this was going on the majority of the rescuing 
party were engaged in keeping off with levelled revolvers the 
police who had returned, and the large crowd that had rapidly 
formed. When Kelly and Deasy were safely out of danger, 
this little ring of men about the van broke up and each sought 
safety for himself. The fugitives were hotly pursued, and 
several of them were captured and savagely handled by the 
crowd. It is worth while noticing that none of the armed 
Fenians used their weapons in their own defence. The only 
shot fired was fired with no deadly purpose ; the death of the 
policeman was absolutely an accident. Whether the rescuers 
would or would not have taken life if they could not effect 
their object otherwise is matter of opinion ; their justification 
for so doing is matter for argument ; the fact remains that the 
solitary shot fired was fired for the purpose of breaking open 
the van door, and that Sergeant Brett was killed by mistake. 
Yet for this shot three men were hanged. 

The captured rescuers were Willia^m Philip Allen, Michael 
Larkin, Michael O'Brien, Thomas Maguire, and Edward 
Condon. All five were tried for the wilful murder of Brett ; 
all five were found guilty ; all five v/ere sentenced to death. 
The state of the English mind at the time was one of unreason- 
ing anger. These men had defied the ]aw ; they had rescued 
two Fenian prisoners ; they were rebels and the friends of 
rebels ; let them die the death. What is called public opinion 
was expressed by a clamour for an example. The public 
mind, curiously inconsistent, flames into easy sympathy with 
revolution abroad, but blazes into deadly fury at any hint of 
revolution at home. Had the men of Manchester been Hun- 
garian volunteers rescuing some Magyar leaders from Austrian 
hands ; had they been Venetians plucking some follower of 
Manin from Teuton jailers ; had they been Poles contending 
with Russians, or Southern Secessionists fighting with the 
Federal Government, the Press would have been loud in its 
praise of the heroism of their deed, and would have heeded 



FENIANIS3I 193 

little if some Austrian or Kussian or Federal soldier had 
fallen in the scuffle. But the Fenians who tried to rescue 
their fellows, and who killed a man by mistal^e, were, in the 
judgment of the general public at that time, nothing but 
common murderers, for whom no plea could be maintained, 
to whom no pity could be extended. 

It must not be forgotten, however, that in that season of 
frantic panic some minds were found calm and just ; that 
through all the wild clamour for death some voices were 
raised' loud and clear for mercy. Mr. John Bright made 
many efforts. Mr. John Stuart Mill exerted himself strenu- 
ously and courageously to save the Manchester men from their 
doom. The English poet, Mr. Algernon Charles Swinburne, 
wrote and published a passionate appeal to his countrymen 
for mercy, an appeal which deserves the gratitude of all the 
generations of Irishmen. 

Freeman he is not, but slave, 
Whoso in fear of the State, 
Asks for council of blood, 
Help of gibbet or grave ; 
Neither is any land great 
Whom in her fear-stricken mood 
These things only can save. 

Lo ! how fair from afar, 
Taintless of tyranny, stands 
Thy mighty daughter, for years 
Who trod the wine-press of war ; 
Shines with immaculate hands, 
Slays not foe, neither fears. 
Stains not peace with a scar. 

Thus Mr. Swinburne sought to sprinkle cool patience upon 
the heat and flame of the distempered public mind, conjuring 
it to mercy by the image of the great, victorious Eepublic. 
In vain poet and philosopher and politician — the three great 
men, and all those who thought with them, strove bravely and 
strove unsuccessfully to stay the hands of the executioner. 
Two of the five condemned men were pardoned— Maguire, 
who after his sentence was proved to have had nothing to do 
with the rescue, and Condon. Allen, Larkin, and O'Brien 

o 



194 IRELAND STNCE THE UNION 

were hanged on November 23, 1867. The manner of their 
death is recorded in Mr. T. D. Sullivan's touching poem, 
' God save Ireland ! ' 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

DISESTABLISHMENT AND EDUCATION. 

The Government had put down the Fenian insurrection, 
but that insurrection had memorable consequences, and a 
memorable influence upon the statesmen of England. There 
were English statesmen sufficiently endowed with political 
foresight to appreciate that although a Fenian rising had been 
put down, the political difficulty which Fenianism represented 
was as great and as complicated as ever. It did not, indeed, 
need a statesman to be a very political Lynceus to perceive 
that the mere suppression of revolution after revolution was 
not, in the long ran, the most satisfactory method of govern- 
ing a country. The very fact of a country being in a condition 
of latent revolution and intermittent rebellion was in itself 
enough to teach such statesmen as were willing to learn, that 
something or other was wrong in this portion at least of that 
complex piece of State machinery, which its admirers were 
accustomed to regard as the most perfect piece of political 
mechanism on the face of the earth, the Government of Ireland. 
Mr. Gladstone was then, as he is now, the most advanced 
thinker and the most keen-sighted statesman in the English 
House of Commons. Then, as now, he was far ahead of his 
fellows in appreciating the inevitable in politics. The younger 
men who have grown up around him are not quicker to see 
what must be done at a great crisis, nor more ready to do it. 
At the time when the Fenian insurrection was lying dead 
beneath, its white shroud of snow, Mr. Gladstone was the one 
man in English statecraft who was keen enough to perceive 
what the Fenian rising meant, and to grasp the vast import- 
ance of the lesson it had taught him. Mr. Gladstone had the 



DTSESTABLISR3IENT AND EDUCATION 195 

genius to appreciate the fact that a nation which could make 
such repeated efforts to shake off a bondage which had been 
gradually lightening, must be suffering from some very serious, 
some very intolerable, grievances. So Mr. Gladstone looked 
a little more closely into the question, and saw that the most 
intolerable grievances from which the Irish people were suffer- 
ing were the Irish Church question and the Irish Land ques- 
tion. 

The condition of Ireland with regard to what was called 
the Irish Church question was one of the greatest scandals in 
modern history. One of the most Catholic among Catholic 
countries, Ireland had languished for generations under the 
most savage system of Penal Laws levelled against her faith ; 
and even now, at a time when the nineteenth century had 
lived more than half its life, Catholic Ireland was compelled 
against its will to maintain a foreign Church, and to hear it 
spoken of, in bitter mockery of themselves and of their creed, 
as the Irish Church. 

One of the most remarkable of all the many remarkable 
facts in connection with the long struggle of Ireland against 
the English rule, is the way in which the Irish people have 
maintained through all the darkest pages of their history their 
devotion to their national Church. That Church, whose 
missionaries and w^hose martyrs alike maintained the princi- 
ples of religion and of education for Western Christianity in 
evil times— that Church had implanted in the hearts of her 
Irish children the deepest and the most passionate attachment 
to her. 

A well-known writer has made use of the beautiful allegory 
with which Moore conveys the attachment of Ireland to her 
own Church. ' " The Irish Peasant to his Mistress " is the name 
of one of Moore's finest songs. The Irish peasant tells his 
mistress of his undying fidelity to her. *' Through grief and 
through danger " her smile has cheered his way. *' The darker 
our fortunes, the purer thy bright love burned ; " it turned 
shame into glory ; fear into zeal. Slave as he was, -with her 
to guide him he felt free. She had a rival, and the rival was 

o2 



196 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

honoured, " while thou wert mocked and scorned." The rival 
wore a crown of gold ; the other's brows were girt with thorns. 
The rival wooed him to temples, while the loved one lay hid 
in caves. " Her friends were all masters, while thine, alas ! are 
slaves ! " "Yet," he declares, " cold in the earth at thy feet 
I would rather be, than wed one I love not, or turn one thought 
from thee j " ' 

Ihe poet has described with all a poet's beauty the 
strength, the profundity, and the purity of the Irish peasant's 
devotion to the Catholic Church, and his loyal refusal, through 
long generations of temptation and of persecution, to abandon 
her for the rival creed which was sought. to be imposed upon 
him by foreign arms. The writer already quoted has shown 
the poetic and religious character of the Irish nature. ' For 
him, as for Schiller's immortal heroine, the kingdom of the 
spirits is easily opened. Half his thoughts, half his life, 
belong to a world other than the material world around him. 
The supernatural becomes almost the natural for him. The 
streams, the valleys, the hills of his native country are peopled 
by mystic forms and melancholy legends, which are all but 
living things for him. Even the railway has not banished 
from the land his familiar fancies and dreams. The "good 
people " still linger around the raths and glens. The banshee 
even yet laments, in dirge-like wailings, the death of the repre- 
sentative of each ancient house. The very superstitions of the 
Irish peasant take a devotional form. They are never 
degrading. This piety is not merely sincere ; it is even 
practical. It sustains him against many hard trials, and 
enables him to bear in cheerful patience a life-long trouble. 
He praises God for everything, not as an act of mere devo- 
tional formality, but as by instinct ; the praise naturally rising 
to his lips. Old men and women in Ireland, who seem to the 
observer to have lived lives of nothing but privation and 
suffering, are heard to murmur, with their latest breath, the 
fervent declaration " that the Lord was good to them always." ' 

This intense spirit of devotion to his creed was accom- 
panied in the Irish peasant by a strong and unconquerable 



BTSESTABLISHBIENT AND EDUCATION 197 

loyalty to it. The infernal ingenuity of the Penal Laws 
might well have seemed calculated in the minds of hostile 
statesmen to root out the Irish faith from the hearts of 
Ireland, to annihilate for ever the Catholic Church in Ireland. 
But the Penal Laws at their worst only seemed to strengthen 
the hold of the Catholic Church over her children, and to 
deepen and widen the affection of her children for the Catholic 
Church. Even when the Penal Laws had ceased to exist, 
when they had become only a hideous record of blundering 
tyranny and misgovernment, the trials of the Catholic Church 
in Ireland were not at an end. The strength of the attach- 
ment of the Irish people for their Church was not to be left 
untested. A man was no longer liable to have his property 
confiscated, or his children stolen from him, or to run the 
risk of imprisonment or exile, because he professed the 
Catholic creed ; the priest had to go no longer in fear of his 
life ; it was no longer a legal sin for Catholic masters to teach 
Catholic children ; but all the indignities that a powerful and 
dominant party could offer, through the Church it sought to 
impose upon the Irish people, were freely offered ; and all the 
disadvantages that could be flung in the way of the Catholic 
Church were so flung persistently. 

The Protestant Church in Ireland was kept alive as a 
State Church out of the substance of the people, to whom it 
could offer nothing, to whom it was only the representative of 
oppression and injury and insult, and to whom its ministers 
were only part and parcel of Ascendency. Ascendency could 
and did maintain for long enough the State Church in Ireland 
against the wishes of the Irish people, and in a large measure 
upon money extorted from the unwilling Irish people. But 
there was one thing it could not do — it could not make the 
Irish people abandon their own faith and worship at foreign 
altars. When the leprous servant of the Assyrian king came 
to the Hebrew prophet, and was made pure of body, he sought 
the permission of the holy man to bend his knee in the house 
of Rimmon. What the companion of the king was willing to 
do for the sake of preserving the royal favour, the Irish people 



]98 IRELAISD SINCE THE UNION 

refused to do to win the pleasure of Ascendency. The Irish 
Church existed, a huge aiiomaly of State-imposed rehgion, 
which the vast majority of the people who were compelled to 
support it refused to have anything to do with, and which re- 
mained one of the bitterest of the many bitter grievances which 
kept alive the detestation of English dominion in Ireland. 

Many attempts, more or less half-hearted and pottering, 
had been made in the House of Commons from time to time 
to approach this Irish Church question with some idea of 
settling it, and a Commission had even been appointed to 
make some kind of investigation of the matter. But the first 
serious blow struck against the Established Church was struck 
by Mr. John Francis Maguire, in a debate in March 1868, on 
a series of resolutions dealing with the condition of Ireland, 
which he submitted to the House. Mr. Maguire was an 
Irish member of great ability and of great integrity. He was 
not an advanced politician in the sense in which we speak of 
advanced politicians to-day. He was not an advanced politi- 
cian twenty years ago ; but he was genuinely devoted to the 
interests of his country, and loyally determined to serve those 
interests in every way compatible with his own opinions as to 
what her best interests were. He was the proprietor of the 
most important paper in the South of Ireland — the Cork Ex- 
a7niner— and. he had made himself a strong position in the 
House of Commons by his independence and his courage and 
his Parliamentary ability. 

In the course of the speech in which he introduced his 
resolutions, Mr. Maguire made a special and powerful attack 
upon the principle which sanctioned the Established Church 
in Ireland. In the debate wiiich followed, the then Irish 
Secretary, Lord Mayo, made a somewhat mysteriously- worded 
speech, in which he threw out hopes that a way might be 
found of introducing religious equality in Ireland without mak- 
ing a sacrifice of the Established Church, and he considerably 
surprised his hearers by an occult phrase about ' levelling up, 
and not levelling down.' 

What Lord Mayo actually meant by the half-hints he 



DISESTABLISHMENT AND EBU CATION 199 

threw out, whether he was giving a kind of tentative ex- 
pression to some idea on the part of the Government, or was 
merely uttering a speculation of his own, must remain an 
unsolved political problem. But the speech and the words 
made it plain to Parliament, and to politicians outside Parlia- 
ment, that the existence of the Established Church in Ireland 
was from that moment down an open question. 

The debate suddenly assumed a new aspect when Mr. 
Gladstone, as leader of the Opposition, rose and announced 
himself an opponent of the Established Church in Ireland. 
Mr. Maguire immediately withdrew his resolutions, and Mr. 
Gladstone brought in a series of resolutions of his own, the 
effect of which would be to sweep away the Established 
Church in Ireland. The debate which followed upon the in- 
troduction of these resolutions was one of the most remark- 
able that has ever taken place in the House of Commons. 
On both sides the feelings of politicians were keenly, even 
bitterly aroused. On both sides the battle was fought stub- 
bornly, even desperately. 

Mr. Lowe made a fierce attack, which has now become 
famous, upon the Irish Church. He compared the Irish 
Church to ' an exotic brought from a far country, tended with 
infinite pain and useless trouble. It is kept alive with the 
greatest difficulty and at great expense in an ungenial climate 
and an ungrateful soil. The curse of barrenness is upon it. 
It has no leaves, puts forth no blossom, and yields no fruit. 
Cut it down ; why cumbereth it the ground ?' The opinion 
which was expressed by Mr. Lowe in these fiercely eloquent 
words proved to be the opinion of the majority in the House 
of Commons. The resolutions were carried by large majorities. 
The Government was defeated upon a question of vital im- 
portance, and Mr. Disraeli appealed to the country. 

The General Election of 1868 was remarkable for the 
expectations it formed, and the way in which these expecta- 
tions were not answered. It had been expected that the 
Parliament chosen upon the General Election would have 
a strongly Eadical and even Democratic element introduced 



200 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

into it. Expectation was not realised. The most advanced 
Eadical in the previous ParHament, Mr. John Stuart Mill, 
was not re-elected for Westminster. Of the many advanced 
Eadical candidates who came forward with Mr. Mill's support 
and approval, none were returned. It had been confidently 
expected by advanced politicians that a certain number of 
working-men candidates would find seats in the new Parliament. 
And many working-men "candidates offered themselves to con- 
stituencies, but in no case was any one of them returned. 

The new Parliament of 1868 presented few bright features 
of difference from the preceding Parliaments. It had no 
more of a Democratic complexion than any of those which 
had gone before ; but it was sufficiently advanced in its views 
to place the Liberal party in power, and to enable Mr. Glad- 
stone to carry into effect his purpose of eradicating the 
Establishment in Ireland. The proposals of the Government 
were that the Irish Church should almost at once cease to 
exist as a State establishment, and should pass into the con- 
dition of a free Episcopal Church. As a matter of Qourse, 
the Irish bishops were to lose their seats in the House of 
Lords. The clergy and laity of the Church were to elect a 
governing body from themselves, which the Government was 
to recognise and incorporate. The English and Irish Churches 
were no longer to be connected, and the Irish Ecclesiastical 
Courts were to be done away with. With regard to the pro- 
tection of the life interests of those holding office in the Irish 
Church, and with regard to the disposal of the fund which 
would return to Government when all such holders of office 
had been indemnified, there were various intricate provisions. 
In considering such claims as these the Government did not 
err on the side of parsimony. But the opposition by which 
they were confronted was so powerful, that they were almost 
compelled to paralyse some part of it by compensating with a 
free hand all those who were about to lose the dignity attach- 
ing to the position of a clergyman in a State Church. 

When all these claims had been met and settled, there yet 
remained in the hands of the Government a considerable sum 



DISESTABLISHMENT AND EDUCATION 201 

of money, which they determined to devote to the alleviation 
of inevitable suffering in Ireland. The Conservative Oppo- 
sition fought the Ministerial proposals step by step and point 
by point with defiant pertinacity. They knew well enough 
that the Government would have its way, and that the 
Established Church in Ireland was doomed ; but they argued 
and wrangled and debated un weary ingiy none the less. One 
of the great points raised by the opponents of the Ministerial 
measure was based on the Act of Union. The 5th article of 
that Act was incessantly quoted, dwelt upon, alluded to in 
the early debates. That article provided ' that the Churches 
of England and Ireland as now by law established be united 
into one Protestant Episcopal Church, to be called "the 
United Church of England and Ireland," and the doctrine, 
worship, discipline, and government of the said United Church 
shall be and shall remain in full force for ever as the same 
are now" by law established for the Church of England, and the 
continuance and preservation of the said United Church as the 
Established Church of England and Ireland shall be deemed and 
taken to be an essential and fundamental part of the Union.' 

The argument, of course, had no validity in it. The Act 
of Union is fortunately as liable to be set aside as any other 
measure. Of late days Ireland's enemies have made use of 
this alteration in the Act of Union to strengthen their argu- 
ment for a reduction of the Irish representation. They argue 
that the mere fact that the Act of Union provides for a certain 
representation in Ireland can no longer be appealed to as a 
definite argument against the reduction of Irish representa- 
tion, because, as the Act of Union has been altered in one 
particular, it may be altered in another. This point is easily 
answered. It is perfectly in accordance with all the princi- 
ples of justice for one nation to alter the terms of conditions 
that she has imposed upon another nation when the alteration 
is for that other nation's benefit. It would be directly in de- 
fiance of all principles of justice for a dominant nation to make 
such alterations to the injury of the other country. 

All the ingenuity and all the obstinacy of the Conservative 



202 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

party could not defeat, could not long delay, the determina- 
tion of tlie Government. On July 26, 1869, the measure 
which disestablished the Irish Church received the royal 
assent and became law. 

The Liberal Government which came into office in 1868 
deemed itself destined to settle for ever any grievances which 
Ireland might have to complain of. Mr. Gladstone admitted 
frankly and freely enough that Ireland had grievances to com- 
plain of ; but if he was convinced of the existence of injustices 
in the existing condition of things, he seemed scarcely less 
convinced of the possibility of removing them in the space, if 
not of a single session of Parliament, at least in a single 
Parliament. The Government came into power with the 
practical recognition of the fact that Ireland and the Irish 
question were to be the important themes of legislation. 
English statesmen had recognised this fact before the Parlia- 
ment of 1868 ; but it is only since the Parliament of 1868 
that the statesman who then made himself the champion of 
Irish wrongs has fully worked out the problem and found the 
solution of the Irish difficulty. 

Mr. Gladstone was in a mood for great legislation in the 
beginning of 1869. He approached Parliament with a list of 
measures long enough to startle the most enthusiastic of his 
followers, and to arouse from Mr. Bright the criticism that 
the Government were attempting to drive six omnibuses 
abreast through Temple Bar ; a criticism which was criticised 
in its turn by another politician, Mr. W. E. Forster, who 
observed that six omnibuses might be unable to pass through 
Temple Bar abreast, but they might pass very successfully 
one after another. Of the six omnibuses, three may be said, 
to pursue Mr. Bright 's ingenious allegory a little further, to 
have been painted green and lettered Ireland. 

The three most important measures which Mr. Gladstone 
had undertaken to pilot in safety tlirough the two Houses of 
Parliament were devoted to Irish questions, and these Irish 
questions were of jpressing and urging importance. The most 
immediate question, which like a great wave had swept the 



DTSESTABLISHBIENT AND EDUCATION 203 

previous Government out of office and carried Mr. Gladstone 
to power on its crest, was the question of the Disestablishment 
of the Irish Church. We have already seen how that great 
reform was effected. The second great question was the Land 
question, and we have already touched upon the principal 
points of the Land Act of 1870. The Land Act of 1870 was 
a very important measure, although it rendered very little 
immediate service to the Irish people, although it was at the 
best but a weak and imperfect piece of legislation, although 
it was not the first chapter, but merely one of the first lines 
in the record of reforms demanded by the system of land 
tenure in Ireland. It was one step in the steady march of 
progress. 

Happily for the world, the statesmen who extolled the 
Land Act of 1870, and went into ecstasies over it, and dwelt 
upon its many merits, and expatiated upon its effect, while 
those for whose relief it was intended failed to discern its 
blessings, were of a different mould from the Prime Minister 
who created it, Having, however, accomplished the Disesta- 
blishment of the Irish Church, which was a great measure, 
and passed his Land Act, which was a small measure, Mr. 
Gladstone turned with fresh purpose to his third enterprise, 
the solution of the great question of Irish Education. Those 
three questions dealt with, Mr. Gladstone appeared to hope 
that Irish disaffection and Irish discontent would vanish for 
ever from the fair face of the island. It had always been the 
delusion of English statesmen to fancy that every small con- 
cession of Ireland's just demands is to silence for ever any 
allusion to demands Avhich are left unsatisfied. Like Pan, in 
the hymn of the English poet, ' Gods and men, they were all 
deluded thus,' and they regarded with stern disapproval the 
contumacious and persistent nation which, when it is offered 
some small plateful of legislative porridge, has the audacity 
to come up with a hungry face and ask for more. This line 
of policy is now the exclusive property of the Tory party. 

The third side of Mr. Gladstone's triangular policy with 
regard to Ireland faced the question of University Education 



204 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

in Ireland. Parliament met on February 6, 1873. The 
Eoyal Speech announced that * A measure will be submitted 
to you on an early day for settling the question of Uni- 
versity Education in Ireland. It will have for its object the 
advancement of learning in that portion of my dominions, and 
will be framed with a careful regard to the rights of conscience.' 

On February 13 Mr. Gladstone introduced his Irish 
University Education Bill, and explained it to an eager and 
attentive House of Commons. The position of Irish University 
education was very serious. Ireland possessed — she could not 
be said to boast of — two Universities. One was the University 
of Dublin, which was then a distinctly and even defiantly 
Protestant organisation ; the other was the Queen's University, 
which had been established under the odd delusion that a 
University body entirely given over to secular instruction 
would satisfy the educational desires of the Irish people. 
This strictly secular system was condemned by the authority of 
the Catholic Church, and it was practically a failure. Ireland 
from an educational point of view presented this extraordinary 
appearance to a curious investigator. In a country in which the 
vast, the overwhelming majority were Catholics, there were 
two chartered Universities, one which was opposed to the 
Catholics, and the other to which Catholics were opposed. 
Under the conditions it ought not to have been very difficult 
for any body of statesmen to see their way out of the 
difficulty. The Catholics asked for a University of their own. 
Nothing, one would think, could be simpler than to accede 'o 
the wishes of the majority of the Irish people and charter 
a Catholic University . 

But Parliamentary ideas were strongly opposed to so 
simple and sensible a solution of the difficulty. Government 
had always recognised grudgingly and sorely against its will 
the Catholic demand, not merely for education, but even for 
existence. If it could it would have liked to shut its eyes to 
the fact that a majority of the Irish people are Catholics. It 
had always acted in the long course of its connection with 
Ireland on a policy based on .this belief, or at least upon this 



DISESTABLISHMENT AND EDUCATION 205 

"Assumption. So the majority of the Parliament were unwill- 
ing to grant a charter for a merely Catholic University ; and 
those amongst its members who did not admit, or did not 
choose to admit, that their objection was levelled against 
Catholics as Catholics, adduced a variety of more or less flimsy 
reasons for refusing to satisfy the natural demands of a 
Catholic country. 

One argument was, that if a charter were granted to a 
Catholic University there would be a distinct risk of lowering 
the national standard of education in the two islands. Another 
equally invalid argument was, that the grant of any funds for 
the purpose of supporting a Catholic University would be 
spending the public money on a purely sectarian body. With 
arguments as vague and as valueless as these, English states- 
men had for long enough persistently rebutted all claims of 
Irish Catholics to be educated according to their own ideas in 
their own country. 

Mr. Gladstone now appeared upon the Parliamentary 
scene with the resolute determination to settle if he could 
a hitherto complex question — a new Alexander solving the 
knot ; a new (Edipus answering the riddling interrogations of 
the Sphinx. He recognised the difficulty ; he saw the neces- 
sity for some remedy ; and he did his best to devise the right 
remedy. Hopeful was the tone of Mr. Gladstone's speech on 
February 13, 1873, when he explained to the attentive Com- 
mons the principles of his Irish University Education Bill. 

Unfortunately, however, the Bill itself did not quite 
answer to the hope of its introducer, and did not appear to 
Irish Catholics, and their representatives in the House of 
Commons, to be so satisfactory a settlement of the vexed 
question as it appeared to the Prime Minister. Mr. Gladstone 
proposed to make the Dublin University the central University 
of Ireland, and to make it not merely an examining, but a 
teaching body. Trinity College was to be separated from the 
Dublin University, and the theological faculty separated from 
Trinity College. Trinity, the Colleges of Cork and Belfast, 
and the existing Catholic University — an institution which 



206 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

was supported entirely by a voluntary fund, and which had no 
charter — were all to become affiliated colleges of a newly- 
created University. The Galway College was to be wiped out 
of existence altogether. The theological faculty, which had 
hitherto existed in connection with Trinity College, was to be 
given to a representative body of the Disestablished Irish 
Church, together with a fund for carrying out the purposes 
for which the theological faculty had hitherto existed. The 
new University was to have no chairs for theology, moral 
philosophy, or modern history. The governing body of the 
University was to be composed in the first instance «f twenty- 
eight ordinary members, to be nominated in the Act. Vacan- 
cies were to be filled by the Crown and by co-option alternately 
for ten years ; after that time four members were to retire 
annually — one successor to be named by the Crown, one by 
the council, one by the professors, and one by the senate. In 
addition to the ordinary members, the afiiliated colleges would 
be allowed to elect one or two members of council, according 
to the number of pupils in each college. The money to sus- 
tain the University was to come in proportionate allotments 
from the revenues of Trinity College, a very y^ealthy institu- 
tion ; from the Consolidated Fund, the fees of students, and 
the surplus of Irish ecclesiastical property. Trinity College 
and each of the other affiliated colleges would be allowed to 
frame schemes for their own government. 

Such was the plan by which Mr. Gladstone trusted that he 
had succeeded in threading the labyrinth of the Irish Univer- 
sity question ; such was the scheme by which the Prime Minister 
hoped for a moment that he had succeeded in reconciling 
opposing principles and satisfying contending claims — only for 
a moment, however. AVhen the excitement of the particular 
sitting in which the Bill was introduced had passed away, the 
Prime Minister discovered that his method was not the right 
one. 

The first reception accorded to the Bill in the House of 
Commons was of a nature to deceive its introducer. A great 
man}' speakers said a great many civil things about the pro- 



DISESTABLISHMENT AND EDUCATION 207 

posed scheme, and a few dissentient voices were raised. But 
if few dissentient voices were heard that night there was no 
lack of dissentient opinion, which soon enough found tongue. 
The measure which was meant to please everybody pleased 
nobody. Englishmen of most creeds objected to the Bill. 
The vast Nonconformist body protested against any endow- 
ment for the purposes of Catholic denominational education. 
They received no endowment, they argued, and therefore no 
other sectarian body ought to receive it. The Irish Protestants, 
already sore over the disestablishment of their Church in 
Ireland, protested loudly against the proposed interference 
with their old-established University system. The Irish 
Catholics declined definitely and distinctly to accept the pro- 
posed measure, which did not meet their demands. It did 
not satisfy their wishes. It made no answer to their claims. 
They wanted a Catholic University, and that Catholic Univer- 
sity Mr. Gladstone's measure did nofc propose to give them. 

The outcry against the measure steadily increased in 
volume. In all parts of Ireland all parties protested against 
it. The Roman Catholic prelates held meetings to oppose 
the scheme, and joined in a declaration which contained the 
following passages expressing their views : ' That, viewing 
with alarm the widespread ruin caused by godless systems of 
education, and adhering to the declarations of the Holy See, 
we reiterate the condemnation of mixed education as fraught 
with danger to that divine faith which is to be prized above 
all earthly things. . . . That the distinguished proposer of 
this measure, proclaiming as he does in liis opening speech 
that the condition of Roman Catholics in Ireland with regard 
to University education is " miserably bad," " scandalously 
bad," and, professing to redress this admitted grievance, 
brings forward a measure singularly inconsistent with his 
professions, because, instead of redressing, it perpetuates that 
grievance, upholding two out of three of the Queen's Colleges, 
and planting in the metropolis two other great teaching insti- 
tutions the same in principle with the Queen's Colleges. . . . 
That, as the legal owners of the Catholic University, and, at 



208 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the same time, acting on behalf of the Catholic people of 
Ireland, for whose advantage and by whose generosity it has 
been established, in the exercise of that right of ownership, 
we will not consent to the affiliation of the Catholic University 
to the new University, unless the proposed scheme be largely 
modified ; and we have the same objection to the affiliation of 
other Catholic colleges in Ireland.' 

A second reading was speedily and persistently opposed. 
Mr. — now Sir — Lyon Playfair made himself conspicuous in 
his opposition — on the ground that it was unreasonable and 
absurd to exclude modern history from any national University, 
and in which he talked wildly about sacrificing free inquiry 
to. ecclesiastical dictation. Dr. Playfair did not recollect that 
Mr. John Stuart Mill, a thinker who was, to put it mildly, at 
least as gifted and as far-seeing as Dr. Playfair himself, con- 
sidered history as one of those branches of knowledge which 
are best left to private study. He did not reflect, too, that 
the teaching of modern history might present some difficulties 
in an Irish University of the kind proposed by Mr. Gladstone, 
the members of which would hardly be likely to look with the 
same eye upon any of the events of Irish history. Dr. Play- 
fair's opposition was in itself a matter of small importance, 
but it served to show the variety of men and minds arrayed 
against the scheme. 

On the same day when Dr. Playfair delivered his some- 
what unfortunate protest, a deputation of Irish members 
waited upon Mr. Gladstone to inform him that they were 
bound to support denominational and religious education 
ao'ainst secularisation. A little later a Pastoral from Cardinal 
Cull en was read in all the Irish Catholic churches, which 
described Mr. Gladstone's Bill as endowing ' non-Catholic 
and godless colleges to those who for centuries have enjoyed 
the great public endowments for higher education in Ireland, 
and then, without giving one farthing to Catholics, it invites 
them to compete in their poverty, produced by penal laws 
and confiscations, with others who, as the Prime Minister 
states, are left in possession of enormous wealth. The new 



mSESTABLTSTTMENT ATTD EDUCATION 209 

University scheme only increases the number of Queen's 
colleges, so often and so solemnly condemned by the Catholic 
Church and by all Ireland, and gives a new impulse to that 
teaching which separates education from religion and its holy 
influences, and banishes God, the Author of all good, from our 
schools.' 

The opposition came to a head on March 11, on the 
fourth night of the debate on Mr. Bourke's amendment. The 
House was crowded to its fullest ; both sides were animated 
by the keenest emotions of anxiety and expectation. The 
general impression that the Government was about to sustain 
a defeat was visible on the faces of most men. Mr. Disraeli, 
fired and animated by a triumphant consciousness of impend- 
ing victory, made one of his most brilliant and most para- 
doxical speeches. * We live in an age,' said Mr. Disraeli, 
* when young men prattle about protoplasm, and when young 
ladies in gilded saloons unconsciously talk atheism. And 
this is the moment when a Minister, called upon to fulfil one 
of the noblest duties that can fall upon the most ambitious 
statesman — namely, the formation of a great University — 
formally comes forward and proposes the omission from public 
study of moral and mental philosophy.' He described the 
new council of twenty-eightj persons, which was to form the 
governing body, as coming to be * very much what you have 
in the House — two parties organised and arrayed against 
each other, with two or three trimmers thrown in on each 
side.' 

From assaults upon the particulars of the Bill, Mr. Disraeli 
proceeded to a direct attack upon the author of it. * You 
have now,' said Mr. Disraeli, ' had four years of it. You have 
despoiled churches. You have threatened every endowment 
and corporation in the country. You have examined into 
everybody's affairs. You have criticised every profession and 
vexed every trade. No one is certain of his property, and no 
one knows what duties he may have to perform to-morrow. 
I believe that the people of this country have had enough of 
the policy of confiscation.' 

P 



210 IBELAXD SIXOE THE rXTOJSr 

The speecli ^Yas extravagant. It was levelled against the 
measure, not because it was not Irish enough, but because it 
was too Irish, Mr. DisraeU thought. But it delighted Mr. 
DisraeH's followers, whose views it expressed perfectly. The 
description which Mr. Disraeli gave of the measure in his 
concluding sentences was one which exaggerated the ^-iews of 
every opponent of the Bill. ' I must vote,' said Mr. Disraeli, 
* asfainst a measure which I believe to be monstrous in its 
general principles, pernicious in many of its details, and 
utterly futile as a measure of practical legislation.' 

Mr. Gladstone concluded the debate, and accepted defeat 
v\uth a dignified and statesmanlike composure. In concluding, 
Mr. Gladstone was eloquent in his appeal to the sacred name 
of justice. * To mete out justice to Ireland according to the 
best view that with human infirmity we could form, has been 
the work — I will almost say the sacred work — of this Parlia- 
ment.' Such measure of human infirmity as Mr. Gladstone 
admitted to himself then, has not prevented him, fortunately, 
from meting out in a later day justice to Ireland in the way 
that the Irish people themselves most desired. 

In the face of almost inevitable defeat, ]\Ir. Gladstone still 
persisted in regarding his measure as one which might be law. 
' As we have begun,' he said, ' so let us go through, and with 
a firm and resolute hand let us efface from the law and the 
practice of the country the last — I believe it is the last — of 
the relio'ious and social errievances of Ireland.' There was 
something exceedingly pathetic, there was something almost 
tragic, in the picture of a great English statesman seriously 
striving with aU his heart and soul to remove h'om the Irish 
people all the political and all the social grievances of which 
they had to complain, and striving unsuccessfully then. Ex- 
perience has taught Mr. Gladstone, in the twelve years that 
have gone by since that eventful March morning, that Ireland's 
political and Ireland's social grievances are only to be efi'aced 
from the minds and memories of her children by Home Rule. 
Mr. Gladstone addressed a few w^ords of dignified reference to 
the Ii'ish members who had supported him in his two previous 



DISESTABLISHMENT AND EDUCATION 211 

measures, and who had gone .against him in this, and were 
helping to overthrow him, as more than twelve years later 
another body of Irish members were again destined to turn 
him from office. 

About two o'clock on the morning of the 12th the 
division took place, and the Government were defeated by a 
majority of three. Mr. Gladstone immediately resigned 
office, but Mr. Disraeli declined to accept it ; and Mr. Glad- 
stone had to return to power with a shaken majority and a 
damaged party. 



OHAPTEE XIX. 

THE HOME EULE MOVEMENT. 

The Fenian insurrection had been put down ; most of its 
leaders were in prison or in exile ; many were dead. The 
Government and the Government party in Ireland believed 
that another ten or twenty years of apathetic acquiescence 
in their rule was secured to them. Indeed, for the few years 
that immediately succeeded the collapse of the rising of 1867 
there seemed to be every prospect of such hopes finding 
fulfilment. The years immediately following upon the Fenian 
outbreak were years without a history for Ireland. Somebody 
has said, foolishly enough, that the country is happy which 
has no history. Ireland had no history in the national sense in 
these years of evil, and yet she could hardly be called happy. 
Landlordism, that had been frightened out of its wits by the 
apparition of what it and its kind called the revolutionary 
spectre in its midst, was taking its revenge for its alarm by 
fresh and persistent oppression of the peasantry, whom evil 
chance had delivered into its hands. Eack-renting and evic- 
tions flourished ; and for a time it seemed as if the landlord 
party were to have it all their own way, and as if national 
aspirations had been flung back for a generation. 

Just, however, when things were looking their blackest, 

p2 



212 ISELAXD SIXCi: THE UXIOy 

there came a new gleam of liope. A moTement was in- 
augurated wliicli was destined to develop into something very 
much more powerful than its early founders ever dreamed of 
or desired; wliicli was destined after iifteen years of varying 
and stormy fortunes to cause the overthrow of an English 
Ministry, and to hring the Irish demand for national inde- 
pendence very delinitely into what English statesmen are 
fond of terming the tield of practical politics. In the ]\Iay 
of 1870 a meeting was held in an hotel in Dublin, which was 
attended by representative Irishmen of almost all classes of 
society and almost all phases of political and religious opinion. 
The majority, however, was composed of Protestant Conser- 
vatives. The meeting was summoned to consider the pohtical 
position of Ireland, and to debate the question as to what ought 
to be done to advance her interests. 

The presence at that meeting of so large a body of 
Protestant Conservatives is not dithcult of explanation. The 
Irish Protestants were inspired at that time with mingled 
feelings of alarm at and hatred of Mr. Gladstone and Mr. 
Gladstone's recent Irish poHcy. The disestablishment of what 
was caUed the Irish Church had caused that tierce irritation 
which men always feel when they have been suddenly de- 
prived of rights and privileges over a foreign population. 
Some of the Irish Protestants, therefore, who attended that 
meeting in Dublin in the May of 1870 were animated chieiiy 
by a dislike and dread of Mr. Gladstone, and by the gradually- 
daT^iiing conviction that, on the whole, they might hope to 
fare better at the hands of the Irish people themselves than 
at the hands of their patrons across St. George's Channel. 
Others there were, however, men not in one sense of the term 
Nationalists, who saw more clearly than English statesmen 
could or would see, that the desire for national independence 
was one of the deepest -rooted feelings in the Irish heart. 
These men had suihcient pohtical foresight io perceive that 
no measures of disestablishment, no small concessions here 
and small amehorations there, would in any degree satisfy the 
aspirations of the Irish people. It was not small concessions 



THJ^: HOME RULE MOVEMENT 213 

that the Irish people were asking for, but the just demand to 
be allowed to have their voice heard in the administration of 
their own afi'airs. 

Some, therefore, of those who attended the meeting were 
prepared to meet the Irish demand half-way. They saw there 
were only two alternatives before the English Government — 
either to concede to Ireland some measure of self- administra- 
tion, or to keep on for ever struggling at greater or less inter- 
vals with active or intermittent rebellion. Of the two alter- 
natives they preferred for their own peace, and for the peace 
of the country, that the principle of self-government should 
be conceded. There were others at the meeting of more 
advanced views —Fenians and friends of Fenians — who re- 
cognised the fact that for the time any acquirement of their 
rights by a strong hand was out of the question, and who were, 
therefore, prepared to go in with a, constitutional movement, 
and strive to attain some measure of national independence. 
There was one man present at that meeting — a man of dis- 
tinction and of a rare ability that at times seemed closely 
akin to genius — who was fated to be for a season the leader of 
the new movement. 

Mr. Isaac Butt was at that time a man of fifty-five years 
of age, whose life had been devoted to law and politics, and 
occasionally to literature. He had begun his political career 
as a strong opponent of nationalism, and had been chosen by 
the Irish Protestant Conservatives to fight their fight and 
plead their cause for them against O'Connell himself, in the 
days when Kepeal was the watchword of the national party. 
O'Connell, at the end of a debate, had prophesied that the 
time would come when his eloquent young opponent would be 
found * in the ranks of the Irish people,' and the prophecy of 
O'Connell had come to pass. Mr. Butt in course of time 
found himself the legal and the political champion of Irish 
nationalism. He v.as a lawyer of the greatest skill and 
subtlety — a skill and subtlety worthy of Daniel O'Connell him- 
self ; and at the time of the meeting in Dublin, and for many 
years previously, he was practically without a rival at the Irish 



214 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Bar. In 1848 lie had played a prominent part in the defence 
of Smith O'Brien and Thomas Francis Meagher at Clonmel ; 
and at the time of the Fenian risings he defended many of the 
most conspicuous of the political prisoners. 

He became as years went on more and more of a Nationalist, 
and less and less of an adherent of the Conservative party. 
The Conservatives, with that unwisdom which at times charac- 
terises tliem in their dealings with their adherents, had some- 
what ]ieglected Isaac Butt. The Conservative party have 
always an innate distrust of brilliant men — even when the 
brilliant men belong to their own country, and rise from their 
own ranks. All the successes that the Conservative party 
have achieved in modern times have been due to the enter- 
prise and genius of one or two brilliant men whom the Con- 
servative party as a whole has at first sourly mistrusted and 
disliked, and only accepted in the end with reluctant resigna- 
tion to the inevitable. The steady-going Conservative chiefs 
as a rule like steady-going followers. They have a vague 
dread of abilities of the kind which they characterise as showy ; 
and when they avail themselves of such abilities they are 
seldom grateful for the services that have been rendered them. 
So the Conservative leaders somewhat unwisely neglected 
Mr. Butt. 

One Conservative leader, keener than his fellows, in at 
least appreciating the services of Mr. Butt, recommended 
the rarty, in a letter to a colleague, 'to buy Butt.' This 
cynical piece of advice showed that the writer understood the 
value of Mr. Butt's allegiance ; but it showed also that the 
writer did not quite understand Mr. Butt's character. Mr. 
Butt was by no means the Englishman's ideal of a prudent 
politician. He was not a keen, cool, hard-headed man of 
business. He was not always very wise in the w^ay in 
which he ordered his own personal affairs. He was often 
enough in difficulties, which are very embarrassing to a poli- 
tician, and, perhaps, still more embarrassing to a politician's 
friends. But he was emphatically not a man to be bought, 
though the cynical Conservative counsellor seemed to think he 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 215 

was. His political record is wholly free from such a suspicion. 
In any case, the Conservative party made no attempt to buy 
Butt, in which they were wise, and made no attempt to con- 
ciliate him, in which they were foolish. He gradually dropped 
away from his alliance with them ; he disappeared from poli- 
tical life altogether for a time, and when he came to the front 
again he came as the inaugurator of a new departure in Irish 
politics, as a leader of the Home Eule movement. 

He was a genuinely eloquent and brilliant speaker, and he 
made a brilliant speech at the meeting in Dublin, at which he 
urged on his hearers the common union of all policies and all 
parties for the one goal of Irish self-government. It was he 
who proposed the resolution declaring ' that the establishment 
of an Irish Parliament with full control over our domestic 
affairs was the only remedy for the evils of Ireland ; ' and the 
resolution was carried unanimously. A committee was im- 
mediately formed to draw up a series of resolutions to con- 
stitute the platform of the Home Eule party. It is curious 
and interesting to study now what these resolutions were whicla 
then seemed so terrible in their audacity in the eyes of English 
statesmen. 

* I. — This association is formed for the purpose of obtain- 
ing for Ireland the right of self-government by means of a 
National Parliament. 

' II.— It is hereby declared, as the essential principle of 
this association, that the objects, and the only objects, 
contemplated by its organisation are : 

* To obtain for our country the right and privilege of 
managing her own affairs, by a Parliament assembled in Ire- 
land, composed of Her Majesty the Sovereign, and her suc- 
cessors, and the Lords and Commons of Ireland ; 

' To secure for that Parliament, under a federal arrange- 
ment, the right of legislating for and regulating all matters 
relating to the internal affairs of Ireland, and control over 
Irish resources and revenues, subject to the obligation of con- 
tributing our just proportion of the Imperial expenditure ; 



216 IRELAND SINCE IHE UNION 

* To leave to an Imperial Parliament the power of dealing 
witli all questions affecting the Imperial Crown and Govern- 
ment, legislation regarding the colonies and other dependen- 
cies of the Crown, the relations of the United Empire with 
foreign States, and all matters appertaining to the defence and 
the stability of the empire at large. 

* To attain such an adjustment of the relations between 
the two countries, without any interference with the preroga- 
tives of the Crown, or any disturbance of the principles of the 
constitution. 

* III, — The association invites the co-operation of all Irish- 
men who are willing to join in seeking for Ireland a federal 
arrangement based upon these general principles. 

* IV. — The association will endeavour to forward the object 
it has in view by using all legitimate means of influencing 
public sentiment, both in Ireland and Great Britain, by taking 
all opportunities of instructing and informing public opinion, 
and by seeking to unite Irishmen of all creeds and classes in 
one national movement, in support of the great national object 
hereby contemplated. 

* V. — It is declared to be an essential principle of the 
association that, while every member is understood by joining 
it to concur in its general object and plan of action, no person 
so joining is committed to any political opinion, except the 
advisability of seeking for Ireland the amount of self-govern- 
ment contemplated in the objects of the association.' 

But the movement which was then inaugurated spread 
rapidly by one of the surest tests which can be applied to any 
political movement — the test of the elections. It was soon 
found that Home Kule had a great hold upon the mass of the 
Irish people. A curious proof of the condition to which 
Ireland had been reduced is afforded by a study of the names 
of the men who were then returned to Parliament as leaders 
in the front rank of the Irish movement. Mr. Mitchell-Henry 
and the late Mr. P. J. Smyth are not exactly politicians of 
the kind that Irish nationalism of to-day looks upon with any 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 217 

great favour. The late Mr. P. J. Smyth, as we have seen, 
had never outgrown the traditions of the 1848 movement, in 
which he played no conspicuous part. Of late years, shortly 
before his death, he came to be distinguished chiefly as a 
bitter and unscrupulous enemy of those who were recognised 
as the leaders of the Irish people. 

But at the time when the Home Eule movement was still 
in its dawn, the election of Mr. P. J. Smyth and the election 
of Mr. Mitchell-Henry were hailed with jubilation as proof of 
the amount of vitality in the country. The election of Mr- 
John Martin for Meath, and of Mr. Butt himself for Limerick, 
gave fresh impetus to the advancing movement, which now 
began to be regarded with equal enthusiasm in Ireland and 
indignation in England. The demand of the Home Eule 
party was not a very appalling one. It was clear and simple 
enough. It did not, indeed, plead for the restoration of 
Grattan's Parliament, for the restoration of a Parliament 
which practically ignored the rights of Catholics in a Catholic 
country was hardly likely to appeal even to the moderate 
politicians who first began the Home Eule agitation. What 
they asked was a separate Government for Ireland, still allied 
with the Imperial Government, on principles such as those 
which regulated the alliance between the United States of 
America. The proposed Irish Parliament in College Green 
would have borne much the same relation to the Parliament 
at Westminster that the Legislature of every American State 
bears to the head authority of the Congress in the Capitol 
at Washington. All that related to local business it was 
proposed to delegate to the Irish Assembly ; all questions of 
Imperial policy were still to be left to the Imperial Govern- 
ment. 

There was nothing very startling, very daringly innovating, 
in this scheme. In most of the dependencies of Great 
Britain, Home Eule systems of some kind were already esta- 
blished. In Canada, in the Australian colonies, the prin- 
ciple might be seen at work upon a large scale ; upon a small 
scale it was to be studied nearer home in the neighbouring 



218 IB ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Isle of Man. One of the chief objections raised to the 
neyf proposal by those who thought it worth while to raise 
any objections at all, was that it would be practically im- 
possible to decide the border-line between local affairs and 
Imperial affairs. The answer to this is, of course, that what 
has not been found impossible, or indeed exceedingly difficult, 
in the case of the American Kepublic and its component 
States, or in the case of England and her American and 
Australasian colonies, need not be found to present unsurpass- 
able difficulties in the case of Great Britain and Ireland. But 
this demand, modest as it was, aroused the wildest indigna- 
tion and the most vigorous opposition in England. English 
journalists and politicians alike mistook the importance of the 
movement. They cried out almost unanimously that England 
would never listen to such a demand, that it was no use 
making it, as it would never be entertained or even investi- 
gated. 

This attitude of uncompromising refusal only served to 
give further strenr;th to the Home Eulers. * If the Home 
Eule theory,' says Mr. Lecky, ' brings with it much embarrass- 
ment to English statesmen, it is at least a theory which is 
within the limits of the Constitution, which is supported by 
means that are perfectly loyal, legitimate, and which, like 
every other theory, must be discussed and judged upon its 
merits.' This was exactly what English statesmen and 
politicians sternly refused to do in the early years of the 
decade of 1870. They would have none of the Home Eule 
theory. They would not adnnt that it could possibly come 
within the limits of a constitutional question. ' Home Eule 
never could and never shall be granted, so what is the use of 
asking it ? ' they said. 

This was the temper in which Home Eule was at first 
received in and out of Parliament. Even much later, 
politicians who piqued themselves on being practical, and 
who had been gradually forced to consider the possibility, if 
not the necessity, of some scheme of local government for 
Ireland, still strove to fight off the consideration of the ques- 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 219 

tion by saying, ' What is the use of discussing the question of 
Home Eule until you who support it present us with a clear 
and definite plan for our consideration ? ' 

This form of argument was hardly less unreasonable than 
the other form of uncompromising antagonism. The sup- 
porters of Home Eule very fairly answered, ' We maintain 
the necessity for establishing a system of local government 
in Ireland. That cannot be done without the Government ; 
till, therefore, the Government is willing to admit that Home 
Eule is a question to be entertained at all, it is no use bring- 
ing forward any particular plans. Wlaen it is once admitted 
that some system of Home Eule must be established in 
Ireland, then will be the time for bringing forward legislative 
schemes and plans, and out of the multiplicity of ideas and 
suggestions creating a complete and cohesive whole.' 

The principle of Home Eule obtains in every State in the 
American Union, though the plan of Home Eule in each 
particular State is widely different. The principle of Home 
Eule obtains in every great colony of the Crown, but the 
plan pursued by each colony is of a very different kind. 
Now that the people of the two countries have practically 
agreed together to allow Ireland to manage for herself her 
own local affairs, it will be found very easy to shape a scheme 
exactly deciding the form which the conceded Home Eule is 
to take. But to bring forward the completed scheme before 
a common basis of negotiation was established would have 
been more the duty of a new Abbe Sieyes, with a new theory 
of irregular verbs, than of a practical and serious politician. 

But, whether English statesmen liked it or not, were 
compromising or uncompromising in their attitude towards it, 
the Home Eule movement was an accomplished fact. Every 
day increased the popular interest and the popular support 
accorded to the new organisation. After the General Election 
of 1874, some sixty members were returned for Irish con- 
stituencies who had stood before their constituents as Home 
Eulers. Most of them were w^hat would be called to-day 
very moderate Home Eulers. Indeed, many of the names in 



220 IRELAND SINGE THE UNION 

that sixty would not suggest to the politician of to-day the 
idea of any very active or very daring political reputation. 
But for a time the Home Eule party in Parliament appeared 
a very formidable body, indeed, in the eyes of English 
Ministers and English members of Opposition. But with all 
his sixty men, and all his own ability and eloquence, and 
with all the enthusiasm of the country behind him, and with 
all the strength that lies in a new movement, Mr. Butt did 
not make much use of his opportunities. The Home Eule 
party was in existence, but its existence was not an active one. 
Mr. Butt and his followers had proved the force of the desire 
for some sort of National Government in Ireland, but the 
strength of the movement they had created now called for 
stronger leaders. A new man was coming into Irish political 
life who was destined to be the most remarkable Irish leader 
since O'Connell. 

Shortly after the General Election of 1874, a vacancy 
caused by a Government appointment left Dublin County Open 
to a contest. A young Irish Protestant landlord came forward 
to fight for the seat as a Home Rule candidate. At that time 
little or nothing was known in Ireland of the new man who 
was to become the leader of the Irish people. Mr. Parnell 
was a member of the same family as the English poet, 
Parnell, and the two Parnells, father and son, John and 
Henry, who had stood by Grattan to the last in the struggle 
against the Union. He was the grand-nephew of Sir Henry 
Parnell, the first Lord Congleton, the advanced Eeformer and 
the friend of Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne. He had been 
educated entirely in England. He had been for some time at 
Cambridge University, and had travelled much in America. 
In 1871 he had settled down on his estates in Avondale, 
within whose boundaries is to be found Moore's Vale of Avoca 
with its meeting waters, and was apparently about to content 
himself with the career of an Irish country gentleman. But 
it would have been as possible for a Napoleon to remain a 
simple sub -lieutenant as for Mr. Parnell to pass his days as a 
quiet country gentleman. So his unsuccessful Dublin contest 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 221 

of 1874 brought him for the first time into pubUc notice in 
Ireland. 

It is curious to have to record that when Mr. Parnell 
addressed his first meeting in the Dubhn Eotunda he was 
exceedingly nervous, and practically broke down, so that, we 
are told, the persons who were present on the occasion 
prophesied of him that if he ever got into Parliament he 
would only play the part of a silent member. In 1875 Mr. 
Parnell stood again, on the death of John Martin, as candidate 
for Meath, and was successfully returned after a stiff contest. 
That Meath election marks the date of a new and important 
epoch in the histories of Ireland and England. 

At first Mr. Parnell attracted absolutely no notice in the 
House of Commons ; one member of the numbers who were 
simply regarded as the rank and file, and whose position in 
the representative assembly was of little importance to them- 
selves, and of no importance to anyone else. Presently, 
however, Mr. Parnell began to force himself a little upon 
public attention. He began to ask questions, to make speeches, 
to show he had a very keen and ready appreciation of the 
duties of Parliamentary life, and a very remarkable power of 
assimilating and interpreting the rules of the House itself. 
His name began to be talked about. English members talked 
with some curiosity of the pale slight young man who sat for 
an Irish constituency, and who was beginning to cause some 
ferment among the Irish representatives in the House of 
Commons. 

The presence of the member for Meath seemed to be 
quickening the Irish Parliamentary party into a new existence, 
and animating it with a fresh and unexpected activity. Mr. 
Butt's placid leadership, his well-ordered and regulated field 
nights for the discussion of Irish questions, which were 
immediately allowed to drop into complete oblivion until the 
next set scene was ready, had reconciled English members 
very much to the presence of the Home Eule party in the 
House of Commons. It did no harm ; it took up a night 
now and then, it is true ; but it had one or two good speakers 



222 IBELANB SINCE THE UNION 

— its leader in especial was a very eloquent man — its members 
were many of them pleasant enough, and so the English 
parties on both sides of the House had come to tolerate the 
Home Eulers, and to listen to their periodical display of 
patriotism with a kind of good-humoured compassion. All 
this easy-going, jog-trot, old order of things was now under- 
going a change beneath their very eyes, and the change was 
due to the agitating presence of the young man who repre- 
sented Meath. 

In 1877 the House first came definitely into conflict with 
the new factor in Irish politics, when the Home Eule members 
made a determined stand against the principle of bringing on 
important business late at night, or rather early in the 
morning. On this point they fought vigorously, employing 
all the rules of the House that assisted them ; moving the 
adjournment of the debate and the adjournment of the House 
alternately, and very seriously interfering with the old Minis- 
terial privilege of rushing work unnoticed through the House 
of Commons at an unseemly hour in the morning. The House 
of Commons, as a body, bitterly resented the action of Mr. 
Parnell and those who acted with him, and sought to express 
its resentment in its time-honoured, old-fashioned way, and 
the time-honoured, old-fashioned way failed utterly, as such 
ways will sometimes when applied unwisely to new conditions 
which are too strong for them. 

In old days a member of the House who pursued any line 
of policy unpopular to the majority was rapidly howled and 
shouted into silence. The majority, to do it justice, did its 
very best to howl and shout Mr. Parnell down, but failed 
hopelessly. It had howled and shouted down Sir Charles 
Dilke and Mr. Auberon Herbert a few years before when these 
two members proclaimed themselves Eepubhcans to an aston- 
ished and insulted Senate ; but Mr. Parnell and his half-dozen 
colleagues were not to be howled or shouted down. If the 
House shouted and howled while they were talking so much 
the worse for the House, and so much the greater waste of 
time. They went on talking till the House was tired, or they 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 223 

quietly or composedly moved motions of adjournment, wliicli 
had to be tested by a process of long divisions, and which 
could not be howled or shouted out of existence. 

The term ' obstruction ' has been applied very frequently 
and very angrily to the policy which Mr. Parnell and his 
followers pursued then, and to the policy which Mr. Parnell 
and his increasing number of followers have had occasion to 
pursue from time to time in the years that came after. 
Indeed, there appears to be a kind of popular, loose im- 
pression abroad that obstruction was invented by the Parnel- 
lites ; that until the unlucky hour which introduced the 
member for Meath into the House of Commons such things 
as talking against time, dilatory motions, and the whole 
machinery of obstruction had never been employed — had 
never been so much as heard of. As a matter of fact it had 
often been employed before, with good effect, long before Mr. 
Parnell ever came into the House of Commons. Mr. Glad- 
stone himself had once announced his determination of 
opposing an obnoxious measure by every means which the 
forms of the House permitted to him. The Tory party had 
often enough shown themselves to be past masters in the art 
of obstruction. A very gifted and brilliant Irish politician, 
Sir John Pope Hennessy, recently Governor of the Mauritius, 
was, during the period of his successful Parliamentary life, 
more than once conspicuous for the skill and ability of his 
obstructive tactics. In point of fact, obstruction, like 
everything else beneath the sun, was not a new method of 
Parliamentary warfare. The Irish members did not invent 
obstruction. It had been practised often before, for special 
purposes, by Liberals and Tories alike. But they applied the 
method with considerable ingenuity and consistence. 

Equally ignorant, equally unfair, is the popular, loose 
impression that Mr. Parnell obstructed for the pure joy in 
obstruction, merely for the pleasure of delaying business — any 
business — and without any definite purpose whatever. This 
is, of course, so amazing, so astounding a misconception, that 
it seems extraordinary that it ever should be necessary to 



224 IRELAND SINCE THE TTNION 

contradict it. The obstruction of 1877 was levelled against a 
most unjust and unbusinesslike method of going through 
Parliamentary work, and one which pressed with particular 
unfairness upon Irish members. The opposition which Mr. 
Parnell and those who sided with him raised to the Prison 
Code, and to the Army and Navy Mutiny Bills, rendered a 
most signal service to all those Bills. ' Whoever,' says Mr. 
A. M. Sullivan, * will take into his hand the Prison Code of 
this country, and the Army and Navy Mutiny Bills as they 
stood before Mr. Parnell and his audacious band began opera- 
tions on them in March 1877, and compare those three codes 
with what they were as they emerged from that purifying 
ordeal, will be struck with amazement and admiration.' 

But the worst of it is, that the hostile critics of Mr. 
Parnell and his friends and his followers never will take the 
trouble to inquire into the accuracy of any of their allegations. 
The soldier who wears the English uniform, the sailor who 
serves in the English navy, whether he be English, Irish, 
Scotch, or Welsh, have the best of reasons to be grateful to 
Mr. Parnell and his allies for the beneficial changes which 
they introduced into the Government measures. A record of 
the debate on the Prison Bills tells the same tale. 

One of the most well-lmown cases of early obstruction 
belongs to the famous South African debate ; and there are few 
Englishmen now who will not be inclined to regret that the 
efforts of Mr. Parnell and his followers on that occasion did 
not prove successful. That was one of the few occasions on 
which the members of the Irish party did not fight their 
fight alone. They had with them the leading lights of the 
English Eadical party below the gangway. Sir Charles Dilke, 
Mr. Leonard Courtney, and Mr. Edward Jenkins — who was 
then a Eadical and a Home Ruler, though he has now become 
a Conservative and an enemy to Home Rule — fought in the 
South African debate as vigorously as any of the Irish 
members, and were as fertile in the employment of the 
resources of obstruction. 

The Bill over which the battle was fought was Lord 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 225 

C irnarvon's South African Confederation Bill, v/liicli provided 
facilities for the voluntary union of the Colonies, and for the 
appointment of a Governor-General, a Ministry, a Legislative 
Council, and a House of Assembly, each Council to be pre- 
sided over by a Chief Executive officer. The Bill was intro- 
duced in the Lords, through which it passed rapidly enough, 
and came down to the Commons. Before it had reached its 
second reading, news came of the annexation of the Transvaal 
by Sir Theophilus Shepstone, the British Commissioner in 
South Africa. The Bill and the annexation were alike strenu- 
ously opposed by Mr. Leonard Courtney, Sir Charles Dilke, 
and Mr. Edward Jenkins, as involving a complete reversal of 
the policy of twenty years previously, when the Orange River 
territory had been given up. 

The opponents of the Bill urged — and urged with a wisdom 
which proved prophetic— that the annexation would involve 
the country in increased expenditure, and inevitable war. 
Some of the Lisli members acting with Mr. Parnell, in their 
position as members of an Imperial body, agreed with the 
English Radicals, and supported them with all their strength 
and fought the fight as stubbornly as they could. They were 
bitterly opposed to the Bill and to the annexation, and they 
were determined to combat both by all the means in their 
power. The old House of Commons tradition that Lish 
members should only interfere on Irish questions, and should 
leave great Imperial matters to be settled by the English 
members alone, was in itself an ingenious argument for 
Home Rule ; but it was not one which Irish members, com- 
pelled to attend an English Parliament, were bound to act 
upon. So J\Ir. Parnell and his followers steadily opposed the 
Bill in Committee step by step, stage by stage, and point by 
point. 

At the end of July there was a sitting of then unparalleled 
length, which endured for exactly twenty- six hours. Other 
and longer records have since completely defeated this ; but at 
the time it was one of the longest sittings the House of Com- 
mons had ever held, and it was looked upon as little less than 

Q 



226 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

a prodigy and a portent ; and a portent it certainly was. 
Motion after motion of adjournment was made, divided on, 
and defeated, the temper of the House with every division 
proving hotter and angrier, and the ParnelHtes more and more 
determined. In the course of the struggle Mr. Butt seized an 
opportunity for severing himself from the unpopular action of 
his fellow-members, and of practically ending his own career 
as a possible leader of an Irish party. He repudiated the claim 
of the Irisli members who were acting with Mr. Parnell to re- 
present the Irish party ; and he declared that if he thought 
they did he would retire from political life altogether. ' I 
would retire,' he said, ' from Irish politics, and from a public 
broil in which no man can take part with dignity to himself 
or advantage to his country.' 

It mattered very little then what opinion Mr. Butt might 
hold or express to Mr. Parnell and to those who thought and 
acted with him. Mr. Butt's career was coming to an end 
with such services as he had rendered. His leadership had 
done little to advance the cause of the country, and if his words 
of renunciation gained for him the applause of the English 
benches, they had no effect in guiding the conduct or affecting 
the policy of Mr. Parnell and the party that was growing up 
around him. In the end, of course, numbers triumphed, and 
the unlucky South Africa Bill became laAv. 

The obstruction, if it had been successful, would have pre- 
vented an unfortunate war and much bloodshed, and some 
humiliating defeats, and some ignominious treaties. It was 
silenced by the sheer force of numbers, and from that time forth 
any comment that any member of the advanced Irish party 
offered upon any measure was described as a systematic policy 
of obstruction. The obstruction of 1877 had, however, one 
good effect. It brought to the front rank of Irish politics the 
most remarkabl ^ Irish politician of the century, and gave the 
Irish people what they had been long looking for, and what 
they had been long looking for in vain — a leader who was 
worthy of the cause. 

Any history of that wild and stormy period of obstruction 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 227 

would be incompletG which failed to do justice to the abil";} , 
the courage, and the loyalty of Mr. Biggar. When Mr. Pai - 
nell was still a young, almost unknown and untried, member 
of the House of Commons, unsifted in the perilous enterprise 
of facing hostile and howling majorities, Mr. Biggar sat by 
his side, faithfully and undauntedly, through all the brunt of 
the battle. In one of the best modern historical novels in the 
English language — ' The Cloister and the Hearth '—the hero 
is comforted, through a long period of sorrow, strife, and 
danger, by a gallant companion, who shares his sufferings, 
helps him to face his dangers, fights his enemies, and at all 
times and seasons is clapping him encouragingly on the back, 
and repeating to him the watchword, ' Courage, camarade, le 
diable est mort ! ' 

In the same spirit of gallant brotherhood Mr, Biggar occu- 
pied his place by the young man who was fighting his first 
fights in a hostile assembly. With imperturbable composure, 
with unalterable good humour, with an apparently mar rellous 
and unwearying staying-power, Mr. Biggar proved himself the 
very ideal lieutenant of the leader of a small minority against 
overwhelming odds. Those who remember that wild night 
ten years ago think even now, with unfeigned amazement, of 
the composed way in which, at four o'clock on that stormy 
morning, Mr. Biggar quietly adjourned to the library to seek 
a little needful slumber, and presently came back, after a due 
interval of time, as fresh as ever, to carry on the fight. That 
South African night might not inappropriately be regarded as 
the birth night of a new Irish Parliamentary j^arty. 

Meanwhile all dispute or discussion with regard to the 
leadership of Mr. Butt was settled by the death of Mr. Butt 
himself in 1879, and Mr. Shaw was chosen leader in his stead. 
Mr. Shaw became leader in difficult times. The Land question 
was coming up again. Mr. Butt, shortly before his death, 
had predicted its reappearance, and been laughed at for his 
prophecy, but he was soon proved to be right. The condition 
of the peasantry was still very bad, their tenure of land pre- 
carious. A new land agitation was inaugurated by a new 

Q-2 



^28 IRELAND SINCE THE UNI ON 

man. Mr. Michael Davitt was the son of an evicted tenant. 
He had lost his arm while a boy in a machine accident in 
Lancashire. When a young man he joined the Fenian move- 
ment, was arrested, and sentenced to fifteen years' penal ser- 
vitude. Seven years later he was let out on ticket-of-leave. 
During his imprisonment he had thought much of the means 
of bettering the condition of Ireland, and had come to the 
conclusion that by constitutional agitation, not by force of 
arms, the improvement could be best accomplished. Mr. 
Davitt went to America, planned out there a scheme of land 
organisation, and returned to Ireland to put it into practice. 
He found the condition of the Irish peasant very wretched. 
For three years the harvest had been going from bad to worse, 
and there was d?aiger of a serious famine. Mr. Davitt and 
his friends organised land meetings in various parts of Ireland ; 
the new scheme was eagerly responded to by the tenant farmers 
in all directions. 

In October, 1879, the Irish National Land League was 
formed. Mr. Davitt and some other Land Leaguers were 
prosecuted for speeches made at some of the land meetings, 
but the prosecutions were abandoned. Mr. Parnell went to 
America to raise funds to meet the distress ; the Lord Mayor 
of Dublin, Mr. E. D. Gray, M.P., raised a furd at home ; so 
did the Duchess of Marlborough. The Government passed 
certain relief measures. The severity of the famine was stayed, 
but neither the Government nor the public and private relief 
was able to prevent a great amount of suffering. Such was 
the condition of affairs in Ireland when Lord Beaconsfield 
wrote his letter to the Duke of Marlborough, in which he at- 
tacked the Liberal party for their compromises with Irish 
' faction and disaffection. 

Quite unexpectedly, in the early March of 1880, Lord 
Beaconsfield issued a political manifesto. The political 
manifesto took the form of a letter to the Duke of Marl- 
borough, in which Lord Beaccnsfield announced his intention 
of promptly dissolving Parliament, and of appealing to the 
constituencies for their verdict upon his policy and the policy 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 229 

of his opponents. The letter covered a vast variety of topics, 
but it was practically a hostile pronouncement against the 
Irish Parliamentary party, then mider the nominal leader- 
ship of Mr. Shaw and the virtual leadership of Mr. Parnell. 
It was no question of foreign policy which drove Lord Beacons- 
field into an appeal to the country, which cannot be described 
as premature, but which was certainly unexpected at the time 
when it was made. Ireland was the theme of Lord Beacons- 
field's letter. The difficulty about Ireland was the first topic 
touched upon by him in the last letter of political importance 
he was ever destined to write. Lord Beaconsfield frankly 
recognised the growth of the Home Eule movement, and 
characterised it as dangerous, ' scarcely less disastrous than 
pestilence or famine.' According to Lord Beaconsfield it had 
been insidiously supported by the Liberal party, who sought 
to destroy the * Imperial character ' of England by a ' policy 
of decomposition,' which Lord Beaconsfield called upon all 
' men of light and leading ' to struggle against. 

As we read this letter now, at a distance of seven years from 
the time when it was first given to the world, it is difficult to 
avoid smiling at the way in which history repeated itself, 
only with a slight eccentric transformation of the roles of 
die two great parties in England. Then, in 1880, it was 
Lord Beaconsfield who thundered and anathematised against 
the v/ily and treacherous Liberals who were dallying with the 
seditious phantom of Home Eule, and who were going to give 
up the empire to chaos and old night, in order to please tne 
Irish people and the handful of their representatives. 

Seven years have passed by ; new Ministries have come 
into power and have fallen from power ; and there is a fresh 
appeal to the country impending, and we hear over again the 
same accusation of dalliance with Irish disaffection and alli- 
ance with Irish leaders. But this cry comes this time from 
Liberal as well as from Tory lips. Certain of the men whom 
Lord Beaconsfield so vehemently accused of a desire to 
disintegrate the empire, and to destroy England's Imperial 
character by a policy of decomposition, in which they were 



230 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

assisted by Ireland and the Irish members, are now applymg 
tlie same thing as vigorously and as violently to Mr. Glad- 
stone's followers and Mr. Gladstone's lieutenants in the 
leadership of the Kadical party. It is the Eadicals, we are 
iold now, who are pledged to the hilt to the Irish party, who 
have packed cards with treason, and who are destroying the 
empire by a policy of decomposition. The words are the 
words of Lord Beaconsfield, but the voice is the voice of Mr. 
Chamberlain. But whatever language is addressed by one 
English party to another the position of the Irish people and 
their leaders remains the same. Their power has changed, 
however, marvellously. 

When Lord Beaconsfield issued his fiery letter to the 
Duke of Marlborough the Irish party in the House of Commons 
was few in numbers, was, as a body, feeble of purpose, was, 
indeed, a house divided against itself. Mr. Shaw, who was 
its nominal leader—' Sensible Shaw,' as he was called by his 
friends and admirers — was regarded by everyone as a solid, 
practical man of business ; but he was not the kind of man 
wdio was calculated to shine as a leader of an active and 
energetic political minority in an assembly like the House of 
Commons. Mr. Parnell was the real lender; and round Mr. 
Parnell all that was strong in purpose and in principle of the 
Irish Parliamentary party was forming itself into a group 
that became the core of a later and more successful party. 

Lord Beaconsfield, with the keen political foresight that 
was usually characteristic of him, saw the real strength of 
the little band of men that were clustered round Mr. Parnell ; 
but his insight was not keen enough to allow him to estimate 
that strength at its full value. He saw that tliey were dan- 
gerous, but he made the mistake of thinking that they could 
be crushed out of existence ; and he accordingly struck at 
them with all his strength in his pronouncement to the Duke 
of Marlborough. The Irish party promptly took up the 
challenge. A manifesto was immediately drawn up by the 
Irish leaders, and circulated broadcast wherever an Irish 
voter was to be found, calling upon every man who believed 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 231 

in the national cause and the national leaders to lend a 
hand in flinging the Tory party from office. That call was 
responded to with a promptness which must have appeared 
menacing to any English statesmen of either party who were 
watching the contest with sufficient calmness to appreciate 
the gravity of the appeal to the Irish Parliamentary party, 
'and the answer which the Irish voters gave to it. 

At the time undoubtedly the sympathies of a large portion 
of the Irish people in England went with the Liberal party ; 
but they recorded their votes for the Liberal candidates on 
this occasion for the first time, not because they were Liberal 
candidates but because they were opposed to the Tories. The 
Irish vote throughout the United Kingdom was acting in ac- 
cordance with the advice and entreaty of men to whom a 
scornful and irritated majority denied the right of speaking 
for the Irish people at all. In giving that advice the Irish 
-leaders acted wisely ; in following it the Irish people acted 
'admirably. It was essential at that time for the safety of the 
national movement, for the integrity of the national party, 
that the challenge of Lord Beaconsfield should be taken up, 
and that the Tory Government should be driven from office. 
The personal leanings of Irishmen in England to one or other 
of the great parties were wisely put aside in recognition of the 
fact that it was far more important to furthei- Irish interests 
than to pay heed to the quarrels of Whig and Tory. There 
were plenty of Irishmen in England who, if they had been 
left untrammelled by any other consideration, would gladly 
have recorded their vote in favour of the Tory candidate, but 
who, in obedience to the appeal of lea;ders whose judgment 
they relied upon, whose action they admired, and whose 
opinions they supported, went with a light heart to the polling- 
tooth and voted for the Liberal representative. 
'■ Undoubtedly the Irish vote, given as it thus was, practi- 
cally solid for the Liberal party, counted for much in the 
result of the General Election. Undoubtedly, in the face of 
-the advantage of gaining that vote, English Liberal statesmen 
and Liberal politicians of all classes said a good deal more or 



'Sd2 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

a good deal less than they precisely meant on the Irish ques- 
tion. Either they expressed their sympathy with a warmth 
which cooled down with amazing rapidity when they fomid 
tliemselves in office, or they discreetly kept their disapproval 
of the Irish demands well in the background until the contest 
was safely over. 

The result of the election greatly altered the appearance 
of the Irish party in Parliament. The action of Ireland showed 
decisively and conclusively that the heart of tlie Irish people 
was with Mr. Parnell and the advanced men who supported 
him, rather than with the moderate Home Rulers who were 
represented by Mr. Shaw. Mr. Parnell himself was elected 
for no less than three constituencies, and decided to take his 
place in the House of Commons as the representative of the 
city of Cork. The story of the Cork election is one of the 
most remarkable in the whole history of the General Election 
of 1880. We know now how largely Mr. Parnell's candida- 
ture for Cork, and in consequence his success there, was due 
to the interest and the action of one of his most brilliant and 
gifted lieutenants. The result had an eiTect almost beyond 
the hopes of the advanced party. The seat was a diflicult one 
to win ; and it was won under conditions which made victory 
exceptionally diflicult and exceptionally advantageous. It 
impressed the sense of Mr. Parnell's popularity through Ire- 
land upon Englishmen almost more than all the other elec- 
tions put together. In nearly all the other elections Mr. 
Parnell's candidates were as a matter of course returned, and 
when the Iri&h party assembled at St. Stephen's it was seen 
that ]^-Ir. Parnell could count upon tlie alliance and the adhe- 
sion of a la] ge majority of those who had come to Westminster 
as members of the Home Rule Party. 

The division of the party between those who sided' with 
Mr. Parnell and those who held by Mr. Shaw made itself at 
once apparent. IMr. Parnell and his followers were of opinion 
that it was the duty of any Irish ii minal party in the English 
House of Commons to seat itself in opposition to any Govern- 
ment, Whig or Tory, that might be in office. The Irish vote 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 233 

tad helped to return the Liberals to office, not so much from 
devotion to the Liberals as in order to answer Lord Beacons- 
field's challenge. The good intentions of the Liberal party 
had, indeed, been freely expressed towards Ireland ; but the 
Irish members who were with Mr. Parnell were not quite sure 
of the value of these good intentions, which come so readily 
into the political mind at the time of an election, and which fade 
away so often without any fulfilment or performance. Those, 
therefore, who followed Mr. Parnell, who had already been 
formally chosen as leader of the Irish Parliamentary party at 
a meeting in Dublin, seated themselves below the gangway on 
the Opposition side of the House. Mr. Shaw and the minority 
of moderate Home Eulers took up their places, as loyal ad- 
herents of the Government, below the gangway on the Minis- 
terial side of the House. 

The new Irish party, which followed the lead of Mr. 
Parnell, has been often represented by the humourist as a 
sort of Falstaffian ' ragged regiment,' and its members de- 
scribed as rivals of Lazarus in the painted cloth, to whom the 
mere necessities of life were luxuries, to obtain which they 
would follow any leader or advocate any cause. From dint 
of repetition this has come to be almost an article of faith 
in some quarters. Yet it is grotesquely without foundation. 
A large proportion of Mr. Parnell's followers were journalists. 
Journalists, unfortunately, seldom amass laige fortunes, but 
the occupation is not usually considered dishonourable by 
Lnglishmen, and the journalisis who belonged to the Irish 
party were, to put it mildly, sufficiently intelligent to be able 
to obtain their livelihood by their pens. 

Mr. T. P. O'Connor, for example, was a young Irishman 
who had come to London, and was making his way in English 
journalism. He was a strong Eadical, and had gained a 
reputation by an exceedingly able ' Life of Lord Beaconsfield.' 
Mr. Sexton, who was destined to prove himself one of the 
foremost debaters in the House of Commons, began life in 
the employment of the Waterford and Limerick Piailway 
Company. When he was some twenty years of age he 



231 IRELAND &1NCE THE UNION 

became a writer for the Nation, a newspaper which had 
upheld through long years and under disheartening conditions 
the traditions of Nationalism which had made it famous in 
1848. He had been a writer for the Nation for some years 
when the Geneml Election came. Mr. Sexton, like most 
young Irish journalists who ever wrote for the Nation, had 
taken the keenest interest in Irish politics. He was sent to 
Sligo to oppose Colonel King Harman, an influential landlord 
and a nominal Home Euler. So great was the popular feeling 
for the growing Nationalist party, that an almost unknown 
young writer with the eloquent tongue was returned by a 
triumphant majority over the wealthy landlord, his opponent, 
who had come to regard a seat for Sligo as an item of his 
personal property. Mr. T. D. Sullivan was another Irish 
journalist, the owner of the Nation, eminent in Ireland, and 
aiot in Ireland alone, as a true poet of the people. 

Mr. Healy was not returned to Parliament at the 
■General Election. He did not enter the House of Commons 
until November, 1880, but he may fairly be described with 
the party he was so soon to join, and of which he was already 
a valuable adherent. Mr. Healy came to England at sixteen 
years of age, a poor young man, with his way to make in the 
world. Almost self-educated, he had taught himself, beside 
French and German, Pitman's shorthand, and through his 
knowledge of phonography he obtained a situation as short- 
hand clerk in the oftice of the Superintendent of the North- 
Eastern Kail way at Newcastle, Later on, he came to London 
as the confidential clerk of a manufactory, and as weekly 
correspondent of the Nation. In this capacity he made the 
acquaintance of Mr. Parnell, whom he accompanied on his 
American tour in 1879. From that time Mr. Healy became 
one of the most prominent of the young men who were 
working for the Nationalist cause. He was soon to prove 
the possession of true political genius, and to become one of 
the most brilliant and one of the most important of the Irish 
Parliamentary party. 

Mr. James 'Kelly was a journalist who had been a 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 235 

soldier and a special correspondent in all parts of the world. 
He served in the Foreign Legion of the French army against 
the Arabs at Oran, under Maximilian in Mexico, and had 
narrowly escaped being shot by the Spaniards at Cuba. He 
was yet to peril his life in the red deserts of the Soudan. 
After accompanying the Emperor of Brazil on his tour 
through America, and following the fortunes of the war with 
the Sioux chief, Sitting Bull, Mr. 'Kelly came to England, 
and at once took an active part in the Home Eule movement 
then inaugurated by Mr. Butt. 

Another journalist, one of the most able among the Irish 
members, was Mr. E. D. Gray, the proprietor of the Freeman's 
Journal, probably the most valuable newspaper property in 
Ireland. Mr. William O'Brien, one of the most trenchant 
writers and sincerest patriots who ever served Ireland, entered 
Parliament later. He and Mr. Justin M'Carthy were both 
journalists. 

Those who were not journalists in the Irish party were 
generally what is called well-to-do. Mr. Dillon had inherited 
property from his father. Mr. Biggar had retired from a very 
successful connection with the North of Ireland bacon trade. 
Mr. Eichard Power was a country gentleman of position ; so 
was Mr. ]\Iulhallen Marum ; so was Mr. John Eedmond ; 
so was Mr. William Eedmond, who was elected later ; so 
was Mr. Shell ; so was Mr. Metge. Mr. Arthur O'Connor had 
been in the War Office for many laborious years, and had re- 
tired upon a pension. Dr, Commins was a successful Liver- 
pool lawyer, Mr. John Barry was a prosperous business man ; 
so was Mr. Dawson. Mr. Leamy was a solicitor of independent 
means. Colonel Nolan was an artillery officer of distinction. 
One of the most remarkable figures in the ranks of the Irish 
party was Colonel The 0' Gorman Mali on, with whose career 
we are already familiar. 

It is obvious, therefore, that the Irish Parliamentary party 
was a very solid political body, containing within its ranks 
a large number of men of very remarkable ability, and a 
very goodly proportion of men of ample means and of position 



23G IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

in the conventional social sense. It contained, for its num- 
bers, a proportion of really admirable speakers, all ready, 
many genuinely eloquent, which either of the two great 
parties might have envied. 

The Liberal party, whose triumphant return to office was 
due in so large a measure to the Irish vote, was not a little 
surprised at the attitude taken up by the Irish Parliamentary 
party who followed Mr. Parnell. They could not understand 
why the party who helped to vote them into office should sit 
in opposition. They did not appreciate the full force of the 
new departure. They did not realise that henceforth there 
was to be an Irish party in the House of Commons which 
would not pledge itself in any way to either of the two great 
English parties, but would fight entirely for its own cause, 
and which was always in opposition to any Government which 
did not grant full and complete justice to Ireland. 

But though the Irish party sat in opposition to the Liberal 
party which they had helped to return to power, there did not 
at first appear to be any likelihood of any serious disunion. 
In the previous Parliament the Irish members and the Eadical 
members had been thrown into frequent alliance ; during the 
General Election the bonds of sympathy between the English 
Eadicals and the Irish people seemed to have been strength- 
ened. The Irish vote in England had been given to the 
Liberal cause. The Liberal speakers and statesmen, without 
committing themselves to any definite line of policy, had 
maintained friendly sentiments towards Ireland ; and though, 
indeed, nothing was said which could be construed into a 
recognition of the Home Kule claim, still the new Ministry 
was known to contain men favourable to that claim. 

The Irish members hoped for much from the new Govern- 
ment ; and, on the other hand, the new Government expected 
to find cordial allies in all sections of the Irish party. The 
appointment of Mr. Forster to the Irish Secretaryship was 
regarded by many Irishmen, especially those allied to Mr. 
Shaw and his following, as a marked sign of the good inten- 
tions of the Government towards Ireland. 



THE HOME UTILE MOVEMENT 237 

From the very first, however, it became obvious that there 
was httle chance of any practical friendship between the 
Liberal party in power and the Irish party in opposition. The 
opening record of the new Ministry was marked by a series of 
blunders in their dealings with the various phases of the Irish 
question. The Queen's Speech contained some important 
announcements ; but it was remarkable for yet more important 
omissions. 

The Queen's Speech announced that the Peace Preserva- 
tion Act would not be renewed. This was a declaration of 
considerable moment. From her Union with England Ireland 
had hardly ever been governed by the ordinary law. Since 
the opening of the century stringent coercive measures of 
every description had succeeded, accompanied, and overlapped 
each other with incessant persistence. Now the Government 
were to boldly attempt to govern Ireland without having re- 
course to exceptional and repressive legislation. 

The Queen's Speech, however, referred to Ireland only in 
one other particular — namely, tliat a Bill should be brought 
in for the extension of the Irish borough franchise. The 
borough franchise in England was very much lower than in 
Ireland, the latter system being based upon the old principle 
still extant in English and Irish counties. Every householder 
in England exercised the privilege of the franchise, without 
regard to the value of the house in which he lived. The right 
to vote was conferred by any place in which he and his family 
lived, whether lodging, or room separately held. In Ireland, 
on the contrary, the house in which a man lived had to be 
of a certain value, had to have a certain rental, before its 
occupier might exercise the franchise. No house in an Irish 
borough the yearly rental of which was not 4^. or more could 
qualify for a vote. 

In England and Ireland alike there was a standard of value 
which had to be reached before an occupier had the privilege 
of voting. This condition of things the advocates of the new 
Eeform Bill proposed to change. But extension of the 
borough franchise did not seem to the Irish members in 1880 



23S IB EL A XI) StXCE TUB UNION 

the most important form that legislation for Ireland could 
take just then. The country was greatly depressed by its 
recent suffering ; the number of evictions was beginning to 
rise enormously. The Irish members thought that the 
Government should have made some promise to consider the 
Land question, and above all should have done something to 
stay the alarming increase of evictions. E victims had in- 
creased from 463 famihes in 1877, to 980 in 1878, to 1,238 in 
1879 ; and they were still on the increase, as was shown at 
the end of 1880, when it was found that 2,110 families were 
evicted. 

An amendment to the Address was at once brought 
forward by the Irish party, and debated at some length. 
The Irish party called for some immediate legislation on 
behalf of the Land question. Mr. Forster replied, admitting 
the necessity for some legislation, but declaring that there 
would not be time for the introduction of any such measure 
that session. Then the Irish members asked for some tem- 
porary measure to prevent the evictions which were undoubt- 
edly rapidly on the increase, and appeals were made to the 
Government not to lend landlords military aid in carrying 
out evictions ; but the Chief Secretary answered that while 
the law existed it was necessary to carry it out, and he could 
only appeal to both sides to be moderate. 

For a short time matters went on slowly in this manner, 
the Secret Service vote and the Irish Eelief Bill giving op- 
portunities for animated debates, in the course of which the 
Irish Secretary several times declared his belief that the im- 
proved condition of Ireland would render it unnecessary to 
resort to many of the old-fashioned methods of governing 
Ireland. Evictions speedily increased, however, and Mr. 
O'Connor Power introduced a measure for the purpose of 
staying evictions. The Government, however, refused this 
measure, but brought in a Compensation for Disturbance 
Bill of its own, which embodied some of the points in the 
Irish Bill. The Bill authorised County Court Judges in 
Ireland till the end of 1881 to allow compensation to tenants 



THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 239 

evicted for non-payment of rent, in cases where failure of 
crops had produced the insolvency. 

Mr. Forster described this as nothing more than an 
extension of the Act of 1870, by making eviction for non- 
pa3^ment of rent, in cases where tenants were really unable 
to pay, a disturbance within the meaning of that Act. Mr. 
Forster moved the second reading on June 25, denied that 
it was a concession to the anti-rent agitation, and denounced 
in forcible terms the outrages then taking place in Ireland. 
At the same time he admitted that the annual rate of evic- 
tions had already more than doubled the average rate in 
1877. This was the point at which the difference between 
the Irish people and the Government became strongly marked. 
It was destined to become more marked yet. From that 
moment for live years the natural Knks between the English 
Liberals and the Irish Nationalists were severed. 



OHAPTEE XX. 

THE LAND LEAGUE. 

In order to properly understand the exact position of affairs 
in Ireland at the moment when Mr. Gladstone took office in 
1880, it is no harm to recapitulate some of the events that took 
place under the preceding Ministry, or even earlier. When 
Mr. Gladstone went out of office in 1874, he had passed two 
great Irish measures, and had tripped himself and his ad- 
ministration up over a third. The measure which overthrew 
him was the Irish University Education Bill ; the measures 
which he carried disestablished the Irish Church, and created 
the Land Act of 1870. 

The Land Act of 1870 endeavoured, first, to give the tenant 
some security of tenure ; second, to encourage the making of 
improvements throughout the country ; and third, to promote 
the establishment of a peasant proprietorship. It sought to 
further the first and second of these aims by legalising th© 



240 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Ulster tenant right on farms where it ah'eacly existed, and by 
allowing compensation for disturbance and for improvements 
to evicted tenants on farms where the Ulster tenant-right 
system did not prevail. 

Up to this time the Ulster tenant-right custom was not 
recognised by law, and as it differed widely in different estates, 
it was not very easy to define strictly. Roughly speaking, 
however, it maintained, for those who were bound to it by time 
and tradition, first, that the tenant was not to be evicted so 
long as he paid his rent and acted properly, his landlord having 
indeed the right of raising the rent from time to time, though 
not so high as to destroy the tenant's interest; second, that 
the tenant who wished to leave his holding had a right to sell 
his interest in the farm, subject to the landlord's consent to 
receive a new purchaser as a tenant ; third, that if the land- 
lord wanted to take the land himself, he must pay a fair sum 
for the tenant right. 

It may be fairly said that, wherever the Ulster tenant-right 
custom existed, the relationship between landlord and tenant 
was reasonably good. On estates w^here the custom or anything 
like it did not prevail, the tenant had practically no rights as 
against the landlord. The majority of Irish tenancies were 
tenancies from year to year. These might at any time be 
ended by the landlord after due notice. A comparatively 
small proportion of tenancies were let on leases which gave the 
tenant security of possession for a considerable period, so 
long as he could pay the yearly rent, or the landlord did not 
press too heavily for arrears. In neither case had the tenant 
any right to claim on eviction compensation for disturbance, 
or for any improvements he might have made in the land ; and 
in Ireland, except on a few ' English -managed ' estates, the 
improvements were always made by the tenants. In the yearly 
tenancies the landlord had always the power of raising the 
rent when he pleased ; in estates held on lease he could raise 
it at the expiration of the lease, and, as a rule, the landlord or 
his agent always did so raise the rent whenever the exertions 
of the tenant had made the land of more value than when he 
had entered it. 



THE LAND LEAGUE 241 

Undoubtedly one of the reasons for the wretched condition 
of so many Irish farms and cabins was that the tenant feared, 
and often justly feared, that the smallest si^^n of well-being, 
the least evidence of improvement of any kind, would be taken 
by the landlord or his agent as a sure sign that he might 
safely raise the rent. Raising the rent .was the one great 
dread of the tenant. So great was the poverty of the average 
tenant that, in many cases, it was almost impossible to pay 
any rent at all, and the prospect of having the existing rent 
raised was terror. The Irish peasant is, as a rule, profoundly 
unwilling to emigrate. He loves his land with a passion which 
defies starvation, and he will make any sacrifices and run any 
risks to remain at home. Of those who do emigrate, the 
majority always dream of returning, and many do return, to 
their native land. The land is the love, but it is also the life, 
of the Irish peasant. If he remains in Ireland, he has nothing 
else to live upon, and he is ready to take the land on any terms 
the landlord chooses to make, trusting to Providence to see 
him safely through with his rent at the due time, or hoping 
that the landlord may be found easy-going and unexacting. 
Furthermore, the Irish peasant is in his heart convinced that 
the land is really his ; that the landlord to whom he pays his 
rent and the agent to whom he touches his hat are alike, 
whatever their nationality, the representatives of a hostile 
rule, of a coercion which is no conquest. 

Evictions were the great misery of the peasantry. Evic- 
tions were often for non-payment ofrent, often because the 
landlord wished to clear the ground, and was anxious to get 
rid of his tenants whether they paid their rent or not. In the 
years from 1849 to 1882 inclusive, the evictions have been on 
an average of more than three thousand families a year. The 
highest rates of eviction were in 1849 and 1850, the two years 
immediately following the rising of 1848, when the rates were 
16,686 and 19,949 families in each year. The rate was at its 
lowest in 1869, when the number of evicted families was only 
374. From 1865 to 1878 inclusive, the number of evictions 
never got into the thousands ; in 1879 they were over 1,000 ; 



242 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

m 1880, over 2,000 ; in 1881 and 1882 over 3,000. Tlie Land 
Act of 1870 did not lessen evictions, as great numbers of the 
tenantry in all parts of the country were in heavy arrears of rent. 
In many estates it was practically compulsory for the rent to be 
in arrears by a process known as the hanging gale, by which the 
tenant had always a year's or half a year's rent due and hanging 
over him, thus giving him comjjletely into the landlord's 
power as regarded eviction. 

One of the objects of the Land Act of 1870 was to create 
a peasant proprietary, through the clauses known by the name 
of Mr. Bright. Something of the kind had already existed 
on a very small scale. When the Irish Church was disesta- 
blished, the Church Temporalities Commissioners were given 
the power to aid occupying tenants of Church lands in pur- 
chasing their holdings when it was wished. These tenants 
were allowed, on payment of one-fourth of the purchase-money, 
to leave three-fourths of the purchase-money on mortgage at 
four per cent., the principal and interest to be repaid in half- 
yearly payments, extending over a period of thirty-two years. 
Nearly three-fourths of the tenants occupying Church lands 
did in fact thus purchase their holdnigs. It was with the in- 
tention of increasing such facilities for the purchase of hold- 
ings that the Bright clauses were introduced. A landlord 
and a tenant might come to an agreement under the Act by 
which the tenant could purchase his holding, and receive a 
Landed Estates Court conveyance. 

The very fact, however, that a Landed Estates Court con- 
veyance is absolutely binding in its character, and gives its 
possessor an absolute title to the land acquired, to the disre- 
gard of any subsequent claims that might be made after the 
sale was effected, made the process a costly one. To prevent 
any mistake in the transfer of the land, or injury to any third 
parties, careful investigations had to be made, and elaborate 
requirements gone through, all of which made the process of 
transfer costly and troublesome. The expenses were often 
from ten to thirty per cent, of the price of the farm ; in some 
extreme cases the cost of the transference was very consider- 



THE LAND LEAGUE 243 

ably greater than the actual price of the purchased land. 
Moreover, the tithe rent-charges, quit-rents, and drainage 
charges, to which most Irish estates are subject, remained 
with the land instead of being transferred to the money in 
court, and were a fruitful source of trouble to the new pur- 
chasers. 

All these various conditions combined to make the work- 
ing of the Bright clauses far more limited and unsatisfactory 
than had been intended by their framers. Thus the Act failed 
practically to establish a system of peasant proprietorship on 
anything like an extended scale, or indeed on any scale large 
enough to judge of its working by. It did not give the or- 
dinary tenant any great degree of security of tenure. It 
allowed him, indeed, the privilege of going to law with his 
landlord, but as in most cases the tenant had little or no 
money, while the landlord could fight out the case from court 
to court, appeal to the law was a privilege of no great value 
to the tenant. The chief thing actually accomplished by the 
Act was the legalising of the excellent Ulster custom. 

The passing of the Land Act, instead of settling the Land 
question in Ireland, was destined to give it a fresh impetus. 
The year that saw it passed saw also the formation of an Irish 
organisation which was to be the cause of bringing every 
phase of the Irish question more prominently before the notice 
of England than at any time since O'Connell, if not, indeed, 
since the Union. On May 19, 1870, two months and a few 
days before the Land Act became law, a meeting was held in 
Dublin of representative Irishmen of all opinions, and of all 
political and religious creeds. The object of the meeting was 
to form an organisation to advocate the claims of Ireland to 
some form of Home Government. The words ' Home Eule ' 
were used by some one, and they became at once the shibbo- 
leth of the new party. 

The increase of evictions in Ireland, following as it did 
upon the wide-spread misery caused by the failure of the 
harvests and the partial famine, had generated — as famine 
and hunger have always generated— a certain amount of law- 

r2 



244 IRELAND STNGE THE UNION 

lessness. Evictions were occasionally resisted with violence ; 
here and there outrages were committed upon bailiffs, process- 
servers, and agents. In different places, too, injuries had 
been inflicted upon the cattle and horses of land-owners and 
land-agents, cattle had been killed, horses houghed, and sheep 
mutilated. These offences were always committed at night, 
and their perpetrators were seldom discovered. There is no 
need, there should be no attempt, to justify these crimes. But 
while condemning all acts of violence, whether upon man or 
beast, it must be remembered that these acts were committed 
by ignorant peasants of the lowest class, maddened by hunger, 
want, and eviction, driven to despair by the sufferings of their 
wives and children, convinced of the utter hopelessness of 
redress, and longing for revenge. 

It was difficult to get these poor peasants to believe in the 
good intentions of the Government at any time, and unfortu- 
nately just then the good intentions of the Government were 
not very actively displayed. The Compensation for Disturb- 
ance Bill was carried in the Commons after long debates in 
which the Irish party strove to make its principles stronger, 
while the Opposition denounced it as a flagrant infringement 
of the rights of property. It was sent up to the Lords, where 
it was rejected on Tuesday, August 3, by a majority of 231. 
' The Government answered the appeals of Irish members by 
refusing to take any steps to make the Lords retract their 
decision, or to introduce any similar measure that session. 
From that point the agitation and struggles of the past four 
years may be said to date. 

It is impossible to estimate how much suffering might 
have been avoided if the Government had taken a firmer line 
with the House of Lords in August 1880. The House of 
Lords is never a serious opponent to the will of a powerful 
and popular Ministry ; and if it had once been shown that the 
Government were determined to carry some measure for the 
relief of evicted tenants, it would have soon ceased to make 
any stand against it. But though the Government, through 
the mouth of Mr. Forster, had admitted the alarming increase 



THE LAND LEAGUE 245 

of evictions and the agitated condition of tlie country, they 
refused to take any further steps just then. They promised, 
indeed, to bring in some comprehensive measure next session, 
and they appointed a Committee to inquire into the condition 
of the agricultural population of Ireland. On this commission 
they absolutely refused, in spite of the earnest entreaties of 
the Irish members, to give any place to any representative of 
the tenant-farmer's cause. 

This was a curious illustration of the Irish policy of the 
Government during the early part of its rule. Though the 
Irish members who followed Mr. Parnell might surely have 
been regarded as expressing at least the feelings of a very large 
section of the Irish people, their wishes were as little regarded 
as if they had represented nothing. It seems difficult to 
believe that during the whole of Mr. Forster's occupation of 
the Irish Secretaryship, he never once consulted any member 
of the Parnellite party on any part of his Irish policy ; never 
asked their advice, or even their opinion, on any Irish affairs 
whatever. It is still stranger that he pursued almost the 
same principle with regard to the Irish members who sat on 
his own side of the House — moderate men like Mr. Shaw and 
Major Nolan. 

The speeches of the Land League leaders became more and 
more hostile to the Government. At a meeting in Kildare, in 
August, Mr. John Dillon made a speech in which he called 
upon the young farmers of Ireland to defend evicted Leaguers 
threatened with eviction. He looked forward to the time 
when there would be 300,000 men enrolled in the ranks 
of the Land League ; and when that time came, if the 
landlords still refused justice, the word would be given 
for a general strike all over the, country against rent, and 
then ' all the armies in England would not levy rent in that 
country.' 

On Tuesday, August 17, Sir Walter Barttelot called the 
attention of the Chief Secretary to this speech. Mr. Forster 
described it as wicked and cowardly ; but, while he declined 
to prosecute Mr, Dillon for it, he announced that the Govern- 



24.6 IRELAND SIACU TUB UNION 

ment were watching the Land League speeches very carefully. 
Mr. Dillon immediately came across from Ireland to reply to 
the Chief Secretary's attack. 

Mr. Dillon w^as one of the most remarkable men in the 
national movement. He was the son of John Dillon, the 
Young Irelander and rebel of 1848, with whose history we 
have already made ourselves familiar. When the * Young 
Ireland ' rising failed, John Dillon the elder escaped to 
France, and afterwards to America, and in later years he 
came back to Ireland, and was elected to Parliament for the 
county of Tipperary. He earned an honoura,ble distinction 
in the House of Commons, where his great aim was to 
strengthen the alliance between the Irish members and the 
English Eadicals, and he won the cordial admiration of Mr. 
John Bright. Mr. Bright, as we have seen, paid eloquent 
tribute to the memory of John Dillon in a speech which 
he delivered in Dublin at a banquet which Mr. Dillon had 
organised to Mr. Bright. Mr. Dillon was to have presided 
at the banquet, but he died suddenly a few days before it 
took place. ' I venture to say,' said Mr. Bright, in words 
which may well be repeated, ' that his sad and sudden removal 
is a great loss to Ireland. I believe among all her worthy sons 
Ireland has had no worthier and no nobler son than John 
Blake Dillon.' Mr. Dillon, the son, was a much more extreme 
man than his father. He did not display the sympathy with 
English Radicalism which his father felt, and he appeared to 
have little or no belief in Parliamentary action. He was quite 
a young man, and had been elected for the county of Tipperary 
at the General Election while absent himself in America. 

Mr. Dillon rose in the House of Commons on Monday, 
August 23, and moved the adjournment of the House in order 
to reply to Mr. Forster's attack upon him. The manner of 
his speech was no less remarkable than its matter — quiet, 
perfectly self-possessed. With a low, passionless voice and 
unmoved face, Mr. Dillon met the charges against him. He 
professed his absolute indifference as to what the Irish Secre- 
tary might choose to call him ; but he denied that his speech 



THE LAND LEAGUE 247 

was wicked in advising the farmers of Ireland to resist an 
unjust law. He laid at Mr. Forster's door the difficulties 
and the possible bloodshed that might be caused by the in- 
creasing evictions and the unjust course the Government was 
pursuing. 

Mr. Forster replied by analysing the Kildare speech, and 
repeating his former charges. He accused Mr. Dillon of 
advising his hearers not to pay their rents, whether they could 
afford to or not ; he charged him with something like sym- 
pathy with the mutilation of animals, because, instead of 
denouncing the houghing of horses and cattle that had taken 
place, he had said that if Mayo landlords put cattle on the 
lands from which they could get no rent, the cattle would 
not prosper very much. He quoted sentences from Mr. 
Dillon's speech, that ' those in Parliament faithful to the 
cause of the people could paralyse the hands of the Govern- 
ment, and prevent them from passing such laws as would 
throw men into prison for organising themselves. In Parlia- 
ment they could obstruct, and outside of it they could set the 
'people free to drill and organise themselves ; ' and that ' they 
would show that every man in Ireland had a right to a rifle 
if he liked to have a rifle.' 

Along and bitter debate followed, in w^lnch Irish, Liberal, 
and Conservative members took part. The Irish members, in 
almost every case, appealed to the Government even now to 
do something for the tenants ; the Liberals replied, justifying 
the action of the Government. The next day, Tuesday, the 
24th, another Irish debate arose on a motion of Mr. Parnell's 
on the Parliamentary relations of England and Ireland. On 
the following Thursday, in Committee of Supply, another 
Irish debate arose on the vote for the Irish constabulary 
estimates. This was in many ways a memorable debate. It 
was from the defence Mr. Forster made in this debate of the 
use of buckshot as ammunition for the Irish constabulary that 
the nickname of ' Buckshot ' arose, which will, in all prob- 
ability, be associated Avith his name as long as his name may 
be remembered. Furthermore, this debate was the first cf 



248 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

several famous all-night sittings, which mark at intervals the 
career of the administration. The debate had begun on 
Thursday afternoon ; it was protracted all through Thursday 
night and over Friday morning, and only came to an end 
shortly before 1 p.m. on the Friday, when the Government 
consented to an adjournment of the debate until the following 
Monday. 

On the Monday, after further debate from the Irish mem- 
bers, the vote was finally carried. The Irish case against 
the constabulary was in some measure recognised by Mr. 
Forster, who stated that, although it was quite impossible 
then for the Executive to consent to the general disarmament 
of the constabulary force, yet Her Majesty's Government felt 
bound not to rest until they had placed Ireland in such a 
position as no longer to need the presence of this armed force. 
In some of Mr. Forster's speeches there were menacing 
allusions to the possibility of the revival of the abandoned 
coercive measures ; but, on the other hand, Mr. Forster 
declined to promise to urge the calling of a winter session in 
case the evictions increased, in order to deal with the question. 
On September 7, the House was prorogued. 

The rejection of the Compensation for Disturbance Bill 
and the inaction of the Government gave fresh impulse to the 
agitation in Ireland. Evicting landlords, encouraged by the 
failure of the Government measure, swelled the list of evic- 
tions ; and, on the other hand, all landlords, good and bad alike, 
became the objects of popular antipathy. The Land League 
leaders, members of Parliament and others, advised the tenants' 
passive resistance of eviction and non-payment of rent, in 
the hope that, by a sort of general strike on the part of the 
tenantry, evictions might be delayed until the following session 
saw the introduction of the promised Ministerial measure. In 
fact, the Land League advised the tenants to form a sort of 
tenant trades union, for resisting not merely evictions, but 
the exactions of what they considered an unjust amount of 
rent above Griffith's valuation. 

Griffith's valuation played such an important part in the 



THE LAND LEAGUE 249 

politics of this time, and was so frequently alluded to, that it 
may be well to give some idea of what it Avas. The valuation 
of Ireland was undertaken in 1830 on the recommendation of 
a Select Committee of the House of Commons in 1824. To 
insure uniform valuation an Act was passed in 183(3 requiring 
all valuations of land to be based on a fixed scale of agri- 
cultural produce contained in the Act. The valuators were 
instructed to act in the same manner as if employed by a 
principal landlord dealing with a solvent tenrjit. The 
average valuation proved to be about twenty-five per cent, 
under the gross rental of the country. In 1844 a Select 
Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to recon- 
sider the question, and an Act passed in 1846 changed the 
principle of valuation from a relative valuation of town lands, 
based on a fixed scale of agricultural produce, to a tenement 
valuation for poor-law rating to be made ' upon an estimate 
of the net annual value ... of the rent for which, one year 
with another, the same might in its actual state be reasonably 
expected to let from year to year.' The two valuations gave 
substantially the same results. In 1852 another Valuation 
Act was passed, returning to the former principle of valuation 
by a fixed scale of agricultural produce ; but Sir Eichard 
Griffith's evidence in 1869 shows the valuation employed was 
a ' live-and-let-live valuation, according to the state of prices 
for five years previous to ' the time of valuation. 

Griffith's valuation was indeed but a rough-and-ready way 
of estimating the value of land. In many cases it was really 
above the worth of the land ; in other cases it was below it. 
Still it was a reasonable basis enough, certainly far more 
reasonable than the rates of the rack-rents. The Land League 
speakers condemned all rents above Griffith's valuation — only, 
it must be remembered, in the period of probation while the 
Government was preparing its Land measure — and under their 
direction a practical strike was organised against the landlords 
extorting high rents. It ought to be borne in mind that the 
failure of the Government to pass its Compensation for 
Disturbance Bill, coup''ed with its announcement that it 



250 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

practically intended to reopen the Land question and intro- 
duce a new Land Bill, had driven the bad landlords in Ireland 
to desperation. They thought that the interval between the 
measure that had failed and the measure that was to come 
was the only time left to them, and tbey v/ent to work vigor- 
ously to get all the money they could out of the land before 
the crash came, and the Government, in the formulas of the 
Opposition, ' interfered with the rights of property.' 

It certainly did seem hard that the tenants should have 
been left by the Government at the mercy of landlords who 
were incited to make the most out of their tenancies before 
the new Land Act fell upon them. But as the Government 
had done nothing, the Land League advised the people to 
stand out for themselves ; to pay no rent, and passively resist 
eviction. The supporters of the Land League had another 
enemy besides the landlord, in the person of the land-grabber, 
the man who took a farm from which his neighbour had been 
dispossessed. The strike was supported by a form of action, 
or rather inaction, which soon becpane historical. 

Ca^otain Boycott was an Englishman, an agent of Lord 
Earne, and a farmer at Lough Mask, in the wild and beauti- 
ful district of Connemara. In his capacity as agent he had 
served notices upon Lord Earne's tenants, and the tenantry 
suddenly retaliated in a most unexpected way by, in the lan- 
guage of schools and society, sending Captain Boycott to 
Coventry in a very thorough manner. The population of the 
region for miles round resolved not to have anything to do 
with him, and as far as they could prevent it not to allow any 
one else to have anything to do with him. His life appeared 
to be in danger ; he had to claim police protection. His ser- 
vants fled from him as servants fled from their masters in 
some plague-stricken Italian city ; the awful sentence of ex- 
communication could hardly ha'N o rendered him more help- 
lessly alone for a time. No one would work for him ; no one 
would supply him with food. He and his wife had to work 
in their own fields tliemselves in most unpleasant imitation 
of Theocritan shepherds and shepherdesses, and play out their 



THE LAND LEAGUE 251 

grim eclogue in their deserted fields with the shadows of the 
armed constabulary ever at their heels. 

The Orangemen of the North heard of Captain Boycott and 
his sufferings, and the way in which he was holding his 
ground, and they organised assistance and sent him down 
armed labourers from Ulster. To prevent civil war the 
authorities had to send a force of soldiers and police to Lough 
Mask, and Captain Boycott's harvests were brought in, and 
his pota^toes dug by the armed Ulster labourers, guarded always 
by the little army. When the occupations of Ulstermen and 
army were over, Captain Boycott came to England for a time, 
but in the end he returned to Lough Mask, where, curiously 
enough, he is once again at peace with his neighbours, and 
is even popular, perhaps because he showed that he was a 
brave man. 

The events at Lough Mask, however, gave rise to two 
things — to boycotting on the part of the Land League, and to 
the formation of a body known as emergency men, chiefly 
recruited from the Orange lodges. The business of the 
emergency men was to counteract, wherever it was possible, 
the operations of the League, by helping boycotted landlords 
and land-agents to gather in their harvests. Boycotting v^^as 
freely employed by the League. It meant the practical ex- 
communication of rack-renting landlords, evicting agents, and 
land-grabbers. No sympathiser with the League was supposed 
to have any dealings with the boycotted individuals ; they 
Avere not to be worked for, bought from, sold to. The prin- 
ciple of boycotting was not aggressive ; nothing was to be 
done to the obnoxious person, but, also, nothing was to be 
done for him. This was strictly legal. The law cannot com- 
pel a man to buy or sell with one of his fellows against his 
will. The responsible leaders of the Land League never 
countenanced other than legal agitation. Mr. Michael Davitt 
again and again put on record in public speeches his uncom- 
promising opposition to all intimidation. ' Our League does 
not desire to intimidate any one who disagrees with us,' he 
said ; * while we abuse Coercion we must not be guilty of 



252 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Coercion ; ' and he made frequent appeals to his hearers in 
different parts of Ireland to ' abstain from all acts of violence 
and to repel every incentive to outrage.' * Glorious indeed,' 
he said, ' will be our victory, and high in the estimation of 
mankind will our grand old fatherland stand, if Ave can so 
curb our passions and control our actions in this struggle for 
free land, as to march to success through privation and danger 
without resorting to the wild justice of revenge, or being guilty 
of anything which could sully the character of a brave and 
Christian people.' 

Unfortunately, these good counsels were not always 
obeyed. Famine and eviction had sowed evil seed ; men 
who had been evicted, men who were starving, who had 
seen their families and friends evicted, to die often enough 
of starvation on the cold roadside — these men were not in 
the temper which takes kindly to wise counsel. Outrages 
have invariably followed in the track of every Irish famine, 
and they followed now this latest famine. There were murders 
in different parts of the country ; there were mutilations of 
cattle. These outrages were made the very most of by the 
enemies of the Land League. Scattered agrarian murders 
were spoken of as if each of them were a link in the chain 
of a widely-planned organisation of massacre. People found 
their deepest sympathies stirred by the sufferings of cattle 
and horses in Ireland, who never were known to feel one 
throb of compunction over the fashionable sin of torturing 
pigeons at Hurlingham. 

But while most of the persons who acted thus knew little 
and cared less for the real condition of Ireland, there was one 
man who was studying the country with all the sympathy of 
one of the noblest natures now living on the earth. General 
Gordon — then known best to the world as ' Chinese ' Gordon, 
destined now, perhaps, to be remembered chiefly as ' Soudan ' 
Gordon — was in Ireland examining the Irish question for him- 
self with kind, experienced eyes. He wrote a letter to a friend, 
which was published in the Times on December 3, 1880. ' I 
have been lately over the south-west of Ireland,' General 



THE LAND LEAGUE 25B 

(lordon wrote, ' in the hope of discovering how some settle- 
ment could be made of the Irish question, which, like a fret- 
ting cancer, eats away our vitals as a nation.' After speaking 
of the ' complete lack of sympathy ' between the landlord and 
tenant class. General Gordon went on : ' No half-measured 
Acts which left the landlords with any say to the tenantry of 
these portions of Ireland will be of any use. They would be 
rendered — as past Land Acts in Ireland have been — quite 
abortive, for the landlords will insert clauses to do away with 
their force. Any half-measures will only place the Govern- 
ment face to face with the people of Ireland as the champions 
of the landlord interest.' 

General Gordon then proposed that the Government 
should, at a cost of eighty millions, convert the greater 
part of the south-west of Ireland into Crown lands, in which 
landlords should have no power of control. * For the rest of 
Ireland I w^ould pass an Act allowing free sale of leases, fair 
rents, and a Government valuation. In conclusion, I must 
say from all accounts, and my own observations, that the 
state of our fellow-countrymen in the parts I have named is 
worse than that of any people in the world, let alone Europe. 
I believe that these people are made as we are, that they are 
patient beyond belief, loyal, but at the same time broken- 
spirited and desperate, living on the verge of starvation in 
places where we would not keep our cattle. . . . Our comic 
prints do an infinity of harm by their caricatures. Firstly, 
the caricatures are not true, for the crime in Ireland is not 
greater than that in England; and, secondly, they exasperate 
the people on both sides of the Channel, and they do no good. 
It is ill to laugh and scoff at a question which affects our 
existence.' It is impossible to avoid reflecting with melan- 
choly bitterness on the different aspect that the Irish question 
would now wear if a man like Chinese Gordon could have been 
sent to administrate the country in the place of the egotistical 
and ill-conditioned politician who succeeded to, and was more 
noxious than, famine. 

Still there were outrages, and Ireland was disturbed. 



254 IIIELAND SINCE THE UNION 

The Land League claimed that it did much to prevent out- 
rage ; that the unavoidable violence consequent upon the 
famine and the evictions would have been far greater but 
for them ; that secret conspiracy and midnight outrage were 
notably diminished by their open agitation. The Govern- 
ment, on the other hand, declared that the Land League 
was guilty of inciting to outrage. A State prosecution was 
commenced against the officials of the League — Mr. Parnell, 
M.P., Mr. Dillon, M.P., Mr. T. D. Sullivan, M.P., Mr. 
Sexton, M.P., Mr. Biggar, M.P., Mr. Patrick Egan, Treasurer 
of the Land League, Mr. Thomas Brennan, Secretary of the 
Land League, and some eight others — on a charge of seditious 
conspiracy. The jury were unable to agree, and the trial 
came to nothing. 

In the meantime the country was becoming daily more 
agitated, and Mr. Forster daily more unpopular. His appoint- 
ment had at first been hailed with satisfaction by many of what 
maybe called the popular party, and with anger and alarm by 
the landlords, who regarded him as the herald of startling 
land changes. But Mr. Forster soon became as unpopular 
with the national party in Ireland as ever Castlereagh had 
been. They alleged that he was completely under Castle in- 
fluence ; that he only saw through the eyes and heard through 
the ears of Castle officials ; that he came out prepared to be 
popular and settle everything at once, and that his vanity 
was keenly hurt by the disappointment ; that, finding the 
forces he had to deal with were difficult and complex, he 
could only propose to deal with them by crushing thcDi down. 
He Avas soon known to be in favour of a revival of the policy 
of Coercion. Lord Cowper, the Lord Lieutenant, was an 
amiable, but by no means a strong, man ; in the Cabinet he 
feebly echoed Mr. Forster' s opinions, and in the Cabinet Mr. 
Forster w;is able to carry the day on Irish matters when he 
proposed the revival of Coercion. It was soon blown abroad 
that the Govoiinnent intended to bring in a Land Bill for 
Ireland, and to balance it with a Coercion Bill ; furthermore 



THE LAND LEAGUE 255 

that they intended to bring in the Coercion Bill first, and the 
Land Bill afterwards. 

Parliament met on Thm^sday, January 6, 1881. It found 
the Eadicalism of the Ministry strengthened by the appoint- 
ment of Mr. Leonard Com^tney as Under Secretary for the 
Home Department. The Queen's Speech was able to announce 
the conclusion of the Afghan war, and the intention not to 
occupy Candahar, an intimation that sounded most un- 
pleasantly in the ears of the Imperial party. The Boer war 
was spoken of ; the Greek frontier was declared to be under 
the consideration of the great Powers ; mention was made of 
certain measures of domestic interest, chief among them 
being the Bills for the abolition of flogging in the army and 
the navy. But undoubtedly the most important part of the 
royal speech referred to Ireland. The multiplication of 
agrarian crimes, and the insecurity of life and property, 
demanded the introduction of coercive measures ; while, on 
the other hand, the speech admitted that the condition of 
Ireland called for an extension of the Land Act principles of 
1870. k measure for the establishment of county government 
in Ireland was also mentioned. 

The debate on the address in the House of Lords was 
chiefly remarkable for a brilliant and bitter speech from Lord 
Beaconsfield. In the eight months that had elapsed since the 
new Ministry had come into power, much had happened to 
embarrass them and dim their triumph. Lord Beaconsfield 
was naturally not willing to spare his antagonists the re- 
capitulation of their difficulties. In the lifelong duel between 
Mr. Gladstone and Lord Beaconsfield there came in the end 
to be an amount of accusation and recrimination of so personal 
a nature as almost to recall the traditions of the days of Bol- 
ingbroke and Walpole. Mr. Gladstone's Midlothian speeches 
had struck hard at Lord Beaconsfield, and Lord Beaconsfield 
was not, now likely to let slip the chance of retaliation upon 
his antagonist. He dwelt with scornful emphasis upon the 
complete repudiation of Tory policy which had been so loudly 



256 IRFL.iyi) STNCE THE UNI 01^ 

trumpeted when Mr. Gladstone came into office. What had 
their principles of repudiation brought the Government ? he 
asked. Eetreat from Afghanistan, abandonment of Candahar, 
a Berlin Conference which had reopened the closed Eastern 
question and nearly plunged Europe into war. 

But Lord Beaconstield was naturally most exulting when 
he came to the relations of the Government with Ireland. 
He had been mocked at for his prognostication of danger ; the 
new Ministry were satisfied with the condition of Ireland, and 
were prepared to govern it without the worn-out Tory methods 
of Peace Preservation Acts : and now, after little more than 
half a year of trial, the Government were coming before the 
House, confessing their failure, and seeking to be strengthened 
once again by those coercive measures which they had so lightly 
rejected with every other portion of the policy of their predeces- 
sors. Lord Beaconsfield had a clever case, and he made the 
most of it. With a brilliant maliciousness which recalled tlie 
days when Mr. Disraeli was still a young man with the world 
before him. Lord Beaconsfield appealed to the Lords not to do 
anything in this juncture which might weaken the Administra- 
tion in their late effort to deal with their Irish difficulty. 

Almost at the same time that Lord Beaconsfield was 
attacking the policy of the Government in the Lords, Mr. 
Gladstone was defending it in the Commons. He dwelt upon 
the happy conclusion of the Montenegrin difficulty ; he was 
hopeful of a fortunate settlement of the Greek difficulty ; he 
passed lightly over the 'Afghan war, touched upon the Boer 
war, and justified the Government in not making the Basuto 
war — with which they had nothing to do, and for which they 
were in no measure responsible — their own. But the chief 
point of Mr. Gladstone's speech, as indeed of every speech 
delivered then and for a long time to come, was of course the 
Irish question. The Prime Minister denied that the Ministry 
had any reason to feel humiliation at what had taken place. 
He justified them in not calling Parliament together earlier, 
on the ground that they were determined to do their best with 
the existing law before appealing for stronger measures. In 



THE LAND ZHAGVE 257 

a few remarkable sentonces he censured the late Government 
for the manner in which they had chosen to act upon the 
existing law : they put the law into effect against four men, 
three of whom were utterly insignificant. * One of them, indeed,' 
Mr. Gladstone added, thinking of Mr. Davitt, ' has since 
proved himself to be a man of great ability, but was not then 
of much note.' ' The late Government did not aim their 
weapons at the chief offenders, but contented themselves with 
charging comparatively insignificant men, and, having charged 
them, did not bring them to trial.' ' The method of threat- 
ening without striking is, in our opinion,' said Mr. Gladstone, 
amid the loud cheers of his party, ' the worst course of action 
that could have been adopted ; ' and he pointed to the State 
trials then going on as a proof of the more decided action and 
stronger purposes of the new Ministry. He considered that 
they had done their duty in watching the country for a while 
under the operation of the ordinary law. He thought they 
had now waited long enough, but could not admit that they 
had waited too long, though he declined to allow that the 
coercion which he thought necessary was any remedy for the 
grievances of Ireland. Hence the announcement with regard 
to the new Land Act. He claimed that the Land Act of 1870 
had not been a failure ; but he confessed that the provisions 
of the Act * have not prevented undue and frequent augmenta- 
tions of rent which have not been justified by the real value 
of the holding, but have been brought in in consequence of 
the superior strength of the landlord.' 

Mr. Forster had given notice before Mr. Gladstone spoke 
of the introduction of Bills for the better protection of persons 
and property in Ireland, and to amend the law relating to a 
carrying and possession of arms ; and Mr. Gladstone had 
announced his intention of moving that these Bills should 
have priority over all other business. But these Bills were 
not destined to be introduced for some days to come. The 
address was still to be disposed of, and there were many 
amendments to it to be considered and discussed, several of 
these being moved by Irish members and relating to Irish 

s 



258 IRELANB SINCE THE [TMON 

affairs. But as, according to Thackeray, even the Eastern 
Counties' trains come in at last, so, too, the debate on the 
address came to an end at last. On Thursday, January 20, 
after eleven days of debate, the report of the address was 
agreed to amid general cheering. 

But already the Irish members had roused the anger of 
the Government. Most of the speeches on the address had 
been Irish speeches, the speeches of Irish members on the 
various Irish questions. Before the debate had concluded, 
Lord Hartington had attacked the obstructive policy of the 
Irish members, and warned them that their action might 
compel the House to come to some understanding by which 
the process of business should be facilitated. If every day 
added to the debate on the address staved off the introduction 
of Coercion, so too, Lord Hartington urged, it delayed the in- 
troduction of the promised Land Act. Lord Edmond Fitz- 
maurice and Mr. Thorold Rogers formed themselves into a 
sort of amateur committee on obstruction. They plunged 
into records of old rulings, they became learned in antique 
principles of procedure and venerable points of order, and they 
addressed to the Times, three days before the debate on the 
address concluded, a long letter in which they pointed out the 
existence of certain seventeenth-century orders of the House. 
One of these ruled that ' if any man speak impertinently, or 
beside the question in hand, it standeth with the order of the 
House for Mr. Speaker to interrupt him, and to know the 
pleasure of the House whether they will further hear him ; ' 
an order which was sanctioned and strengthened by later 
rulings. 

On Monday, January 24, 1881, Mr. Forster introduced his 
first Coercion measure. Mr. Forster made out a long and 
elaborate case in justification of the measure. He presented 
a return of outrages to the House of Commons which looked 
alarming at first, but which Mr. Labouchere showed to be 
somewhat curiously manufactured. In many cases outrages 
were of the simplest description ; in many more the number 
was swelled by an ingenious process of subdivision, so that 



THE LAND LEAGUE 259 

one outrage was made to stand for several, by the simple pro- 
cess of multiplying any given oixence by the number of men 
committing it. The total number of agrarian outrages in 
Ireland in the year 1880 was 2,590. Keturns of agrarian 
crimes in Ireland had been made since 1844, but not before, 
and the highest return since that date was for the year 1845, 
the first year of the great famine, in which year the list of 
outrages numbered 1,920, or thirty-five per cent, less than in 
1880. Excluding threatening letters, the number of outrages 
in 1880 was 1,253, as contrasted with 950 in 1845, or thirty- 
two per cent, higher. Moreover, as the population of Ireland 
was only 5,000,000 in 1880, to 8,000,000 in 1845, the propor- 
tion of outrages in 1880 was really more than double the pro- 
portion of outrages in 1845. There were, indeed, few cases 
of murder, or attempts at murder ; the outrages were chiefly 
intimidation by personal violence, by injury to property and 
cattle, and by threatening letters. The number of outrages 
of this kind had greatly increased during the last three months 
of 1880, and the area of intimidation was extending. One 
hundred and fifty-three persons were under the personal pro- 
tection of two policemen on the first day of the new year, and 
1,149 persons were watched over by the police. 

Mr. Forster urged that the existing law was not strong 
enough to grapple with this system of intimidation. The in- 
struments of this intimidation were, however, well known to 
the police ; they were generally old Fenians and Eibbonmen, 
the inauvais sujets of their neighbourhood, dissolute ruffians 
and village tyrants. The new Bill would give the Lord 
Lieutenant power by warrant to arrest any person reasonably 
suspected of treason, treasonable felony, or treasonable prac- 
tices, and the commission, whether before or after the Act, of 
crimes of intimidation or incitement thereto. By this means 
the Government would be able to lay their hands upon the 
mauvais sujets, the village tyrants, and, by depriving the Land 
League of its police, render it powerless. 

Naturally an animated debate followed. The Irish Nation- 
alists, of course, opposed the measure. Moderate Irishmen, 

s2 



260 IRELAND STNCE THE TJNton 

like Dr. Lyons, Mr. Givan, Mr. Richardson, and Mr. Litton, 
either opposed the precedence of coercive to remedial measures, 
or urged the introduction of a Bill to stay unfair eviction 
pending the introduction of the remedial legislation. Mr. 
Bradlaugh did not consider that a case had been made out 
for a Coercion Bill. The Conservative party, of course, sup- 
ported the Government. The debate was adjourned on the 
Monday night, and its resumption was interrupted for a couple 
of days by the first all-night sitting of the year. On the day 
after Mr. Forster's introduction of the Coercion Bill, Mr. 
Gladstone moved to declare urgency for the Coercive Bills, 
and so give them precedence over all other public business. 
The Irish Nationahsts at once set themselves to opposing this 
by every means in tlieir power. The new standing order pre- 
vented the taking of many divisions, as it allowed individual 
members only two motions for adjournment ; so the Irish 
members confined themselves to making speeches, which were 
incessantly interrupted by calls to order from the chair. 

Mr. Biggar, at a comparatively early period of the debate, 
got into a conflict with authority which led to his being sus- 
pended from the sitting ; whereupon he immediately with- 
drew, and, ascending the heights of the strangers' gallery, 
watched the conflict with unwearying interest from that 
elevation, as Ivanhoe followed from his turret the fortunes 
of the Black Knight and his fellows. The struggle, indeed, 
was sufficiently interesting to be worth sitting out. It was 
fought — this being but a first essay for the year — with suffi- 
cient good-humour on both sides. The hours waned, but 
there came no waning in the animation of the speakers on 
both sides. Members came and went ; mgenious little plans 
of relays for relieving guard were arranged. Morning came, 
and brought with it a fog scarcely less obscure than night. 
It was not bright enough till eleven o'clock to extinguish the 
gas. Very dismal the chamber showed when daylight did 
come, as unwashed, unbrushed, with weary, sleepy faces and 
tumbled clothes, the members faced each other. For three 
hours more the fight Avent on, and then, at two o'clock, Mr. 



THE LAND LEAGUE 261 

Gladstone's motion was agreed to, and the House, not un- 
naturally, immediately adjourned to wash, eat, and sleep. 

This was but the prelude to a series of stormy scenes in 
the House, each one surpassing its predecessors in bitterness 
and unpleasantness. The debate on the Coercion Bill was 
resumed on the Thursday, and was remarkable for a speech 
from Mr. Bright. Mr. Bright had kept silence — with the 
exception of a protest against obstruction— since the begin- 
ning of the session, and it had been whispered that he was 
so silent because he was not in accord with his colleagues on the 
Irish question. He was roused from his silence by a speech 
of The O'Donoghue's. The O'Donoghue was at this period 
of his varied political career an ardent supporter of Mr. 
Parnell. He sat in opposition to Government, and made 
himself conspicuous as an aggressive patriot and unfailing 
opponent of the Government. He declared that the Land 
League differed in no respect from the Anti-Corn Law League, 
and taunted Mr. Bright by asking what trials followed the 
agitation and the denunciation of landlords which belonged 
to the movement of which Mr. Bright and Mr. Cobden were 
the heads. 

A little later in the debate Mr. Bright rose and spoke. In 
a speech of great bitterness Mr. Bright attacked the conduct 
of the Irish Parliamentary party. He denied angrily that any 
parallel existed between the action of the Land League and the 
Anti-Corn Law League. With all the indignation of which Mr. 
Bright is a master, and with more than his usual vehemence, 
he flung himself in a very fury of passionate oratory upon the 
Irish opponents of the Government. It almost seemed as if 
Mr. Bright were determined to make it plain, by the very rage 
and whirlwind of his passion, how completely unfounded were 
those rumours which hinted that he was at odds with his col- 
leagues in the Cabinet on the Irish question. He assailed his 
opponents with all the eloquence at his command ; and though 
the speaker was now old, the strength and power of that 
eloquence were still sufficiently impressive, even to those at 
whom all its fierce invective was levelled. 



263 IRELAND SIXCE THE UNION 

The severance of the extreme Irish party and the Govern- 
iiient was now complete. Mr. Bright, who had often sup- 
ported Ireland before and was looked upon as a true friend by 
the Irish people, was now one of the bitterest opponents of the 
whole national movement and of its Parliamentary leaders. 
The Irish national press was fiercely exasperated to find Mr. 
Bright supporting Coercion for Ireland. He had indeed voted 
for Coercion before in his younger days, but he had always been 
eloquent against it, and his utterances were brought up against 
him by the Irish papers, They reminded him that in 1866 
he had described Coercion for Ireland as an ' ever-failinej and 
ever-poisonous remedy ; ' and they asked him why he recom- 
mended the unsuccessful and venomous legislation now. 
They pointed to his speech of 1849, in which he said : * The 
treatment of this Irish malady remains ever the same. We 
have nothing for it still but force a,nd alms.' They quoted 
from his speech of 1847 : ' I am thoroughly convinced that 
everything the Government or Parliament can do for Ireland 
will be unavailing unless the foundation of the work be laid 
deep and well, by clearing away the fetters under which land 
is now held, so that it may become the possession of real 
owners, and be made instrumental to the employment and 
sustentation of the people. Honourable gentlemen opposite 
may fancy themselves interested in maintaining the present 
system; but there is surely no interest they can have in it 
which will weigh against the safety and prosperity of 
Ireland.' 

Such a passage as this might have served, it was urged, 
as a motto for the Land League itself. What other doctrine 
did the Land League uphold but that the land should become 
the possession of real owners, and be made instrumental to 
the employment and sustentation of the people ? Might not 
the Land League have fairly asked the Government what 
interest it could have in the present system of land which 
would weigh against the safety and prosperity of Ireland ? 
Had not Mr. Bright told them too, in 1866, that 'the great 
evil of Ireland is this : that the Irish people— the Irish nation 



THE LAND LEAGUE 263 

• — are dispossessed of the soil, and what we ought to do is to 
provide for and aid in their restoration to it by all measures 
of justice ' ? He disliked the action of the Irish members now 
because they were acting against the Liberal party ; but had 
he not said, in 1866, also : ' If Irishmen were united, if you 
hundred and five members were for the most part agreed, you 
might do almost anything that you liked ; ' and further said : 

* If there were a hundred more members, the representatives 
of large and free constituencies, then your cry would be heard, 
and the people would give you that justice which a class has 
so long denied you'? 'Exactly,' replied his Irish critics. 

* We have now a united body of Irishmen, the largest and 
most united the House has ever seen, and you do not seem to 
look kindly upon it. You do not seem to be acting up to your 
promise made in Dublin in 1866.' 'If I have in past times 
felt an unquenchable sympathy with the sufferings of your 
people, you may rely upon it that if there be an Irish member 
to speak for Ireland, he will find me heartily by his side.' 
At the same speech in Dublin, Mr. Bright said : ' If I could 
be in all other things the same, but in birth an Irishman, 
there is not a town in this island I would not visit for the 
purpose of discussing the great Irish question, and of rousing 
my counirymen to some great and united action.' ' This is 
exactly what we are doing,' said his Land League critics; 

* why do you denounce us now ? Why do you vote for 
Coercion Acts to prevent the discussion of the great Irish 
question ? ' 

The next day, Friday, January 28, while the impression 
of Mr. Bright's speech was still fresh in the minds of the 
House, Mr. Gladstone made a speech which, viewed as a 
piece of Parliamentary attack, certainly far surpassed it. 
With all his eloquence Mr. Gladstone flung himself against 
his enemies, justified the introduction of Coercion in the dis- 
organised condition of Ireland, and bitterly denounced many 
of the speeches of Mr. Parnell and Mr. Biggar. From a 
dramatic point of view the scene in the chamber was singularly 
impressive. If the sheer force of eloquence and anger and 



2Gi IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the support of a powerful and enthusiastic majority could 
have done it, the opposition would have come to an end then 
and there, and the Coercion Bill been carried at once. Never 
since the night when Sir Charles Dilke made his famous 
speech, and Mr. Auberon Herbert announced himself too as a 
Eepublican, had the House witnessed such a scene, though 
since then stormy scenes have been less infrequent. Mr. 
Gladstone was playing the part of Jupiter suppressing the 
revolted gods. Wine, says Macaulay, was the spell which 
unlocked the fine intellect of Addison. Passion is the spell 
which most surely unlocks Mr. Gladstone's skill as an orator 
of attack. The fury of his indignation swept over the House 
and stirred it to its depths, arousing tumultuous enthusiasm 
in the majority of his hearers, and angry protest from the 
minority he was assailing. The pale, unmoved face of Mr. 
Parnell occasionally showed through the storm as he rose 
to correct the Prime Minister in his quotations from his 
speeches, and was howled and shouted, if not into silence, at 
least into being inaudible. 

Vague rumours floated about the House of Commons on 
the Monday evening that there would be troublesome work 
ere night, but at first there seemed no promise of the excited 
and strenuous fighting which kept the weary Commons awake 
through successive days. The Irish members were determined 
to resist the Coercion Bill in every stage to the utmost. They 
challenged Fate, in the sbape of the Ministry, to come into the 
lists and fight it out, and the result was the longest sitting theii 
on record. The hours came and went, the gray dawn stole 
on the heels of night, and ugly night again came breathing 
at the heels of day, and found the Commons still wrangling, 
still dividing, still calling to order, still stupidly sleeping or 
vainly trying to follow the arguments of the various speakers. 
The scene was full of interest to those — and there were some 
— who had the courage to see it out from the watch-towers of 
the Speaker's gallery. 

As the time went on the appearance of the H nise was 
not without elements of humour. One member of the Third 



THE LAND LEAGUE 265 

Party, as the Irish party were called, found the atmosphere 
cold, and insisted upon addressing the House in a long ulster, 
resembling the gaberdine of Noah in the toy-shop arks. On 
the Treasury bench Lord liartington, grimly erect, doggedly 
surveyed the obstructives. He was curiously in contrast with 
Mr. Forster, who sat doubled, or, rather, crumpled up, in an 
attitude of extreme depression. The occupants of the front 
Opposition bench v/ore an air of bland unconcern. ' This is 
not our fault,' they seemed to say, ' but it is not uninteresting, 
and we do not mind seeing you through with it.' 

At ten minutes to five o'clock on the Tuesday morning 
the Speaker left the chair ; the clerk at the table gravely in • 
formed the House of the unavoidable absence of Mr. Speaker, 
and his place was taken by Mr. Lyon Playfair. Still the 
debate went on. Irish member succeeded Irish member in 
lengthy speeches, interrupted by incessant calls to order from 
all parts of the House and from the chair. Somewhere about 
six o'clock the motion for the adjournment of the debate was 
defeated by 141 to 27 : majority, 114. The debate was then 
resumed on the original motion, and Mr. Healy immediately 
moved the adjournment of the House. At twenty-five 
minutes past one on Tuesday afternoon the deputy-diairman 
left the chair, which was reoccupied by the Speaker. 

A small side discussion sprang up at this point, Mr. 
Parnell contending that, by the standing orders of the House, 
the Speaker had not the right to return to his place after that 
place had been taken by the deputy-chairman, until the next 
sitting of the House, a point which the Speaker ruled was 
based on a misconception of the order. At ten minutes to 
three the motion for the adjournment of the House was 
divided upon, and was lost by a majority of 204 ; the numbers 
being, ayes, 21, nays, 225. Still the debate went on, without 
any sign of flagging determination on either side. The ad- 
journment of the debate was then moved by Mr. Daly, and 
this question was fought out for some time and divided upon 
— 23 to 163 : majority against, 140. The debate was then 
resumed on Dr. Lyon's amendment to the main question, and 



266 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the adjournment of the House moved. At half-past eleTen 
on the Tuesday night the Speaker again left the chair, and 
his place was again taken by Mr. Lyon Playfair. At mid- 
night Sir Stafford Northcote appealed alike to the chair and 
the Government to do something to put an end to the obstruc- 
tion. A little later on the debate was enhvened by a wordy 
wrangle between Mr. (now Sir Frederick) Milbank and Mr. 
Biggar. Mr. Milbank complained that Mr. Biggar had used 
offensive language to him in the chamber, and, in consequence 
Mr. Milbank, later on, in the lobby, addressed opprobrious 
terms to Mr. Biggar. Mr. Biggar denied having used the 
words attributed to him, whereupon Mr. Milbank apologised 
to the House. 

By this time a fresh division had been taken, and the 
motion for adjournment negatived by 22 to 197 : majority, 
175. At ten minutes to five on Wednesday morning the second 
unsuccessful attempt to count the House was made. At nine 
o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair, and, immediately 
rising, made perhaps one of the most remarkable speeches 
ever delivered from the chair. The Speaker observed that the 
motion to bring in the Bill had been under discussion for five 
days, and that during that time most of the opposition was 
purely obstructive. By the existing rule nothing could be 
done to stop this obstruction ; but the Speaker was prepared 
to take upon himself the responsibility of ending it by de- 
clining to call upon any more members, and by putting the 
questions at once from the chair. This announcement was 
received with tumultuous cheering, and the Speaker then put 
the motion for Dr. Lyon's amendment, which was defeated on 
a division by 164 to 19 : majority, 145. The Speaker then 
proceeded to put the main question. An L^ish member rose> 
but the Speaker refused to hear him. Then the whole Irish 
party stood up, shouted for some seconds the cry of ' Privilege !' 
— which had not been heard in the House since the day when 
Charles I. came looking for his five members— and, bowing 
to the di.iir, left the chamber in a body. The Bill was im- 
mediately brought in by Mr. Forster. Mr. Forster then 



THE LAND LEAGUE 267 

explained to the House that on the previous I jiday he had 
given into the hands of Mr. Gladstone a speech which he 
beheved to be by Mr. Parnell, and which Mr. Gladstone 
quoted from as being by Mr. Parnell, but which was, as a 
matter of fact, delivered by another person. The House then 
adjourned until twelve o'clock of the same day, when it met 
again to discuss the second reading of the Coercion Bill. 

The Irish members who had left the House in a body that 
morning did not, however, intend to follow the example set 
them by Pulteney and his followers, in the early part of the 
last century, and secede from the House for any length of 
time. When the House met again at mid-day, they returned 
to their places in order to criticise the action of the Speaker 
in bringing the debate to a close on his own motion. Thu 
Speaker, however, ruled that the matter was not a question 
of privilege, and could not be discussed then, but must be 
brought forward on a specific motion. The adjournment of 
the House was then moved by Mr. A. M. Sullivan, and sup- 
ported by Mr. Joseph Cov/en, Mr. Labouchere, LordEandolph 
Churchill, and Mr. Shaw, and argued upon until nearly six 
o'clock, when it was defeated on division by 278 to 44 : 
majority, 234 ; after which, it being six o'clock, and the day 
being Wednesday, the House of necessity adjourned. 

The next day, however, witnessed a still more exciting 
scene, compared wiLli which any mere prolongation of debate 
seemed tame and colourless. At question time Mr. Parnell 
suddenly rose and asked if it was true that Mr. Michael 
Davitt had been arrested that day at one o'clock. There was 
a muimur of surprise, followed immediately by a deep silence 
as Sir William Harcourt rose to reply. 'Yes, sir,' was the 
answer of the Home Secretary, amid the wildest cheering 
from both sides of the House. Had some new conquest or 
some great victory been announced, it could not have been 
greeted with greater rapture. Human nature and human 
voices have their limits, and certainly the limits of human 
voices were severely taxed that day when it was .definitely 
announced that Michael Davitt was once again in prison. 



268 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

When the cheering abated, Sir WiUiam Harcourt went on 
to state that the Irish Secretary and he, after consultation 
with their colleagues and the law officers of the Crown, had 
come to the conclusion that Mr. Davitt's conduct was incom- 
patible with the conditions of his ticket-of-leave. Mr. Parnell 
tried to find out what condition of ticket-of-leave Mr. Davitt 
had broken, but the Speaker called upon Mr. Gladstone, who 
was waiting to submit to the House his urgency motion. Mr, 
Gladstone had risen and begun to speak when Mr. Dillon rose 
also to a point of order. What the point of order was the 
House was not fated to hear ; for amid much noise and shout- 
ing from all parts of the House, the Speaker rose and declared 
Mr, Gladstone in possession of the House. Mr. Dillon, in- 
stead of sitting down when the Speaker rose, and then rising 
again to make his point of order clear, remained standing 
with folded arms facing the speaking Speaker, and demanding 
his privilege of speech. A few seconds of excited confusion 
followed, few members of the House remaining silent. The 
majority shouted against Mr. Dillon. The Irish minority 
shouted scarcely less loudly for him. * Name him,' vocifer- 
ated English members ; to which the Irish members responded 
by shouting, ' Point of order.' Then the Speaker gravely 
named Mr. Dillon for disregarding the authority of the chair, 
not, as he afterwards explained, for rising to a point of 
order while Mr. Gladstone was speaking, but for remaining 
on his feet after the Speaker had risen. Mr. Dillon now sat 
down, and Mr. Gladstone, rising, immediately moved the 
usual formula, familiar enough even then, but destined within 
the next half-hour to become much more familiar, that the 
offending member should be suspended from the service of the 
House for the remainder of the sitting. A division was taken 
and Mr. Gladstone's motion carried by 395 to 33 : majority, 
362. The Speaker then called upon Mr. Dillon to withdraw. 
Mr. Dillon rose again and strove to speak, but the shouts 
with which he was greeted rendered him practically inaudible. 
He was understood to announce that he refused to withdraw. 
The Speaker immediately called upon the serjeant-at-arms to 



THE LAWD LEAGUE 269 

remove Mr. Dillon. At first Mr. Dillon refused to move, but 
at a signal from the seijeant several attendants advanced 
into the House, whereupon, as if accepting this as symbolic 
of sufficient force to remove him by physical strength, Mr, 
Dillon got up and left the House. All that happened imme- 
diately after was an incoherent medley. Mr. A. M. Sullivan 
spoke amid vehement clamour against the Speaker, who ex- 
plained that he had named Mr. Dillon, not for interrupting 
Mr. Gladstone on a call to order, but for remaining on his 
feet when the Speaker rose. 

Mr. Gladstone now made a further effort to go on with his 
speech, and was at once interrupted by The O'Donoghue, who 
loudly moved the adjournment of the House. The Speaker 
taking no notice of this, Mr. Parnell jumped up and called 
out that he moved that Mr. Gladstone should be no longer 
heard. Amid stentorian cheers from his own party and in- 
dignant shouts from the rest of the House, Mr. Parnell reite- 
rated his motion in defiance of the warning of the Speaker, 
and was immediately named. Mr. Gladstone again made the 
motion for expulsion, which was carried by a majority of 405 
to 7, the Irish members refusing to leave their seats and vote. 
On the reassembling of the House, Mr. Parnell refused to 
withdraw until the serjeant-at-arms had gone through the 
same ceremony with him as with Mr. Dillon, when he retired 
amid the plaudits of his party. 

It must here be remarked that, whatever may be the 
opinion as to the wisdom, policy, or propriety of Mr. Parnell's 
conduct on this occasion, there was absolutely nothing * dis- 
orderly ' in the Parliamentary sense about it. But a little 
time before Mr. Gladstone had moved, and moved successfully, 
that a member should be no longer heard, and it had been 
urged in defence of that motion that it was perfectly permis- 
sible, although it had not been made in Parliament for some- 
thing like a couple of centuries. Now, if it was permissible 
for Mr. Gladstone to put this venerable rule into action against 
an Irish member, it was equally permissible for an Irish 
member to put it into practice against Mr. Gladstone. We 



270 lUELAND StWCE THE UNION 

are not speaking now of the good or bad taste of such a line 
of action, nor do we need to be reminded of the impossibihty 
of carrying on the business of any legislative assembly if any 
member might interrupt it by motions that other members be 
not heard. But the Prime Minister had himself revived this 
antiquated form ; he had drawn it out from the dust of cen- 
turies in order to silence an unwelcome speaker ; it had received 
the full sanction of Parliament, and until Parliament repealed 
or altered it, it was in full force. As the rules binding the 
House of Commons affect all members equally — as no mem- 
ber, whether he be at the head of the Government or not, has 
any privilege whatever of making aaiy motion which is denied 
to any other member — it is clear that Mr. Parnell was as much 
in his Parliamentary right as Mr. Gladstone in moving that 
a member should not be heard. So much for the mere ques- 
tion of the motion, the revival of which Mr. Gladstone was 
himself probably the first to regret. 

After the division had been taken, and the leader of the 
Irish party removed, Lord Richard Grosvenor, the Liberal 
Whip, announced that the Irish members had refused to leave 
their seats and enter the division lobby, a line of action which 
Mr. Gladstone immediately expressed a hope that the Speaker 
would find some means of dealing with. He was, however, 
once more interrupted, this time by Mr. Finigan, member for 
Ennis, who, following the example of Mr. Parnell, again pro- 
posed that Mr. Gladstone should be no longer heard. The 
Speaker named Mr. Finigan ; Mr. Gladstone, for the third 
time, made the suspension motion, and a division was again 
taken, and the motion carried by 405 to 2, the Irish members 
again expressing their protest against the whole proceeding 
by remaining in their seats and refusing to vote. The Speaker 
cautioned them that he would regard this abstention as defi- 
ance of the authority of the chair, and the Clerk of the House 
took down their names. 

When Mr. Finigan had been removed from the House, 
after the same fashion as Mr. Dillon and Mr. Parnell, the 
Speaker called the attention of the House to the conduct of 



TTTE LAIS^B IE A GUM 271 

fche Irish members, and ' named ' them at once. There were 
twenty-eight of them in all. Mr. Gladstone immediately rose 
and moved for their suspension in a body, and the motion was 
carried by 410 to 6, the abstaining members, as before, refus- 
ing to vote. Then came a strange scene, such as had never 
been witnessed in the House of Commons before. The name 
of each member was read out in turn by the Speaker, as he 
called upon him to withdraw. Each member called upon 
answered to his name with a short speech condemning the 
action of the Government, and refusing to go unless removed 
by superior force. To each member making such announce- 
ment, the serjeant-at-arms advanced and touched him solemnly 
on the shoulder. In most cases the member so touched at 
once rose and walked out ; one or two exceptionally stalwart 
members, however, refused to go until the serjeant-at-arms 
approached ihem with such a muster of attendants as made 
it evident that he commanded sufficient force to compel with- 
drawal. For half an hour this process of naming, speech- 
making, and removal went on. At length the bulk of the 
Irish members were expelled, and had rallied in the conference 
room, where they drew up an addres3 to the people of Ireland, 
urging them to remain quiet in spite of the indignity offered 
to their representatives. Then, for the fourth time, Mr. 
Gladstone rose and essayed to go on with his motion. 

But, in the meantime, some few Irish members who had 
not been present hitherto in the House had arrived, and 
through their opposition shared their comrades' fate. First 
Mr. O'Kelly, then Mr. O'Donnell, moved that Mr. Gladstone 
be no longer heard, and were named, suspended, and removed, 
while three others — Mr. Molloy, Mr. Eichard Power, and Mr. 
O'Shaughnessy — went through the same process for refusing 
to take part in the division, and remaining in their seats while 
the division went on. Then, none of the Irish members who 
followed the lead of Mr. Parnell being left in the House, Mr. 
Gladstone began his urgency motion for the sixth time, and 
proceeded with it without further interruption. 

After the cowp d'etat by which the Speaker brought the 



272 IRELAND SINCE THE UNTON 

debate on the introduction of the Coercion Bill to an end, the 
Government felt the necessity of altering the rules of the House 
so far as to meet with such emergencies in the future in a 
more legal manner. A set of rules was accordingly drawn up, 
nominally by the Speaker, for the regulation of the business 
of the House when the state of public business should be de- 
clared urgent. These rules limited the occasions and the scope 
of motions for adjournment of either the House or the debate, 
gave the Speaker power of calling the attention of the House 
to continued tediousness and irrelevancy on the part of a 
member, and of taking the general sense of the House on any 
debate, and, if supported by a three-fourths majority, of putting 
the question without further debate. The rules further pre- 
vented the possibility of debate on the motion for the House 
to go into committee on any matter declared urgent, and limited 
members to a single speech. These rules were laid on the 
table of the House by the Speaker on Wednesday, February 9, 
1881. The long-argued-about principle of cloture — or closure, 
to give what has become an English institution its English 
name — was of course conceded in the rule which allowed 
the Speaker, when presiding over a debate governed by the 
urgency rules, to appeal to the general sense of the House, 
and, if supported by a three-fourths majority, to put the 
question at once from the chair without any further debate. 

The debate on the Coercion Bill was not concluded very 
rapidly. On Wednesday, February 23, 1881, the Bill was 
still in committee, and Mr. Gladstone, in order to accelerate 
its progress, moved that on the next day at seven the debate 
should come to an end, and the third reading be moved without 
discussion on any amendments that might be left unconsidered 
at that time. There was no debate permissible upon this 
motion, which was moved by Lord Hartington in the absence 
of Mr. Gladstone, wdio was confined to his room for a few days 
by an accident— he had slipped on the ice near his house, and 
hurt his head — and was carried by 371 to 53 : majority, 318. 
At seven o'clock, accordingly, the debate was cut short by the 
Speaker ; the remaining amendments w^ere divided upon with- 



THE LAND LEAGUE 273 

out debate, and the third reading moved for by Mr. Forster. 
The third reading was carried in the Commons the next day, 
Friday, February 25, by 231 to 36 : majority, 245. The Bill 
was then sent up to the House of Lords, where it passed rapidly 
through all its stages ; was read a third time on Wednesday, 
March 2, and received the royal assent by commission on the 
same day. 

The Arms Bill was introduced in the Commons on Tuesday, 
Mareh 1, by Sir William Harcourt, in the absence of Mr. 
Forster ; and its third reading was carried on Friday, March 
11, by 236 to 26— majority, 210 — and was passed in the Lords 
on the following Friday. During its passage through the 
Commons there were some heated debates on the relationship 
of the American Fenians with the Irish Land Leaguers, in 
one of which, on Thursday, March 3, Mr. Healy suffered 
suspension for charging the Home Secretary with breaches of 
truth and usual disingenuousness. Mr. O'Donnell was sus- 
pended on Tuesday, March 8, after a dispute with Mr. Play- 
fair on a point of order. 

In the meantime the excitement in Ireland was increasing. 
While the Coercion debates were going on, Mr. Parnell had 
gone across to Paris, accompanied by Mr. O'Kelly, and obtained 
an interview with Victor Hugo, who was expected to issue some 
manifesto in favour of Ireland. Victor Hugo compared Ireland 
to Poland struggling against Eussia, but he wrote nothing on 
the subject, either in prose or verse. The interview, however, 
provoked a remonstrance from the great Catholic organ, the 
Unive7's, which warned Mr. Parnell that it was not well for the 
leaders of a Catholic cause and country to «eek for the alliance 
of men like Victor Hugo and his friends. Mr. Parnell had an 
interview with M. Rochefort on the one hand, and with the 
Archbishop of Paris on the other. Just at that moment, 
when people were saying that there would be a split between 
the Nationalists and the Catholic clergy on account of the 
friendship of M. Rochefort, an event occurred which served 
to show how much the Irish priests and the Irish people were 
in agreement as to the Land League and the national cause 

T 



74 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

g^ierally. In Ireland a Ladies' Land League had been 
formed, with Miss Anna Parnell — a sister of Mr. Parnell — for 
its president. Its object was to assist the existing Land League 
in every possible way — by raising funds, by inquiring into the 
cases of eviction, and by affording relief to evicted tenants. 
As soon as this new organisation came into existence it was 
assailed by Archbishop M'Cabe of Dublin. In an angry 
pastoral he denounced the participation of women in the strife 
of politics as at once immodest and wicked. ]\Ir. A. M. 
Sullivan, one of the most Catholic of Irish Catholic members 
of Parliament, immediately wrote a reply defending the Ladies' 
Land League, and justifying and approving of the manner in 
which the women of Ireland proposed to come to the assistance 
of their husbands, fathers, and brothers. Mr. A. M. Sullivan's 
letter had not long been written when the Ladies' Land League 
found a still stronger ally, and Archbishop M'Cabe a still more 
formidable opponent, in Archbishop Croke, of Cashel. From 
the rock which has reminded so many travellers of the 
Athenian Acropolis, Archbishop Croke launched an epistle 
which Jerome might have envied for its vigorous distinctness. 
The Archbishop of Cashel had nothing but praise for the 
Ladies' Land League, and for their eloquent champion. In a 
moment Archbishop Croke was the hero of the national party 
in Ireland. They greeted him with joy as a proof that the 
Church was on their side ; and when he went, shortly after, 
on a sort of tour of inspection through a great part of Ireland, 
he was received everywhere with a display of the most enthu- 
siastic homage and devotion. 

Long before Archbishop Croke had come so prominently 
to the front, many of the priests had shown their sympathy 
with, and approval of, the Land League doctrines ; but after 
the action of the Archbishop of Cashel, their sympathy and 
approval became more openly and markedly displayed. Day 
by day the ranks of the League were swelled by Irish ecclesi- 
astics of all orders. It might be fairly said that, roughly 
speaking, all the younger priests throughout the country were 
in cordial sympathy with the Land League, and a very large 



THE LAND LEAGUE 275 

number of the elder priests as well. It was this sympathy 
between the priests and the people which gave the Land League 
a great pr.rt of its strength ; it was the eagerness of the people 
to be in accord with their priests which made them receive 
Archbishop Croke's pronouncement with so much delight, 
and listen to his counsels with as much readiness as if they 
had come from the lips of Parnell or Davitt. 

When the Coercion Acts were carried, Mr. John Dillon 
went over to L'eland and began a series of speeches in different 
parts of the country, supporting the League and assailing the 
Government. On the one side, the League was being upheld 
from pulpit and platform ; on the other, the Executive was 
choking its prisons with its arrests of ' suspected ' Land 
Leaguers. Evictions had not decreased, and there were fre- 
quent collisions between the police and the people, and blood 
was spilled on both sides. At first the Government arrests 
"were confined to members of the League, who, although 
prominent enough in their own localities, were little known 
outside of Ireland. But Mr. John Dillon's action soon 
attracted the notice of the Government ; and, after a speech 
which he delivered at Grangemaller, near Clonmel, in May, 
which counselled an extreme form of boycotting, he was 
arrested and put into prison. A short while before, the Go- 
vernment had roused great indignation among the Irish eccle- 
siastics by arresting and imprisoning Father Eugene Sheehy, 
of Kilmallock. These were the most important arrests made, 
at first, under the new Coercion Acts. The LandLeague was still 
flourishing. Mr. Sexton, M.P., hurried to Dublin from London 
to take Mr. Dillon's place at theheadof the League in Ireland. 

When the Coercive Acts had passed into law, every one's 
thoughts turned at once to the promised Land Act. But 
there were some other matters to be disposed of before the new 
Land Bill could be introduced. There was a debate on 
Candahar. The Army Discipline Bill, definitely abolishing 
flogging for soldiers, had to pass through its various stages. 
Then there was the Budget, which had of necessity to be dis- 
posed of before any other possible topic could be discussed. 

T L' 



276 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

On Monday, April 4, Mr. Glr^dstone made his financial state- 
ment in a speech of over two liours. The Budget being finally 
disposed of, the ground was now" clear for the Land Bill, 
which was introduced, accordingly, by the Prime Minister on 
Thursday, April 7, 1881. 

The history of the new Land Bill was curious. The 
measure which Mr. Gladstone laid before the Ho ise on April 7 
was not the measure, or indeed anything like tlie measure, 
which the Government had originally intended to offer to 
Parliament. Another Bill had been prepared, of a less com- 
prehensive nature. The draft of this Bill had been submitted 
by a member of the Ministry to a prominent Liberal member, 
who was very properly regarded as an aathority on the Land 
question in Ireland, and who has since been one of the most 
eminent legal members of a Liberal Ministry, with the request 
that he would make any suggestions he thought fit as to its 
possible improvement. The member consulted returned the 
draft Bill promptly, saying that the only improvement he could 
suggest would be to put the proposed measure behind the fire. 
The Government apparently acted upon this summary advice ; 
at least, if they did not put their valueless land scheme actu- 
ally behind the fire, they speedily prepared a new and more 
advanced measure. Even the new Bill was mild enough, and 
bore very little resemblance to the form it came to assume 
later on. 

Mr. Gladstone introduced the Bill on April 7, 1881, in a 
long, elaborate, and exceedingly eloquent speech on what he 
then not inappropriately called ' the most difficult and the most 
complex question ' which he ever had to deal with in the course 
cf his public life. Koughly speaking, the Bill proposed to 
deal with the Irish Land question on the basis of what was 
known as the three F's — fair rent, fixity of tenure, and free 
s^ile. Mr. Gladstone denied that either the iniquity of the 
existing land laws, or any sympathy with the extreme views 
of some of the Irish land reformers, or the bad conduct of 
Irish landlordism in general, called for the new attempt at 
legislation. It was the * land hunger,' or rather the land 



THE LAND LEAGUE 277 

scarcity ; it was certain defects in the Land Act of 1870, and 
it was the rack-renting and evictions of a limited number of 
landlords which had inspired the action of the Government. 

The Government was not in want of guidance in the step 
it was taking. A commission—the Kichmond Commission — 
had been appointed by the previous Government to inquire 
into the Land question. Another commission — the Bess- 
borough Commission — had been appointed by the existing 
Government for the same purpose. These two Commissions 
had begot, not two reports, but a perfect ' litter' of reports. 
There was naturally an agreeable diversity of opinion among 
these various reports. One member of the Richmond Com- 
mission, Mr. Bonamy Price, was for applying, ' in all their 
unmitigated authority,' the principles of abstract political 
economy to the very exceptional Land question of Ireland, 
* exactly as if he had been proposing to legislate for the in- 
habitants of Saturn or Jupiter.' Of the four commissioners 
who made up the Bessborough Commission, only two agreed 
to sign what may be called the main report : Mr. Shaw signed 
one collateral report, The O'Conor Don signed another, and 
Mr. Kavanagh signed a third. Out of this multiplicity of 
counsel, however, Mr. Gladstone found that, with the excep- 
tion of Mr. Bonamy Price, the whole body of both commis- 
sions were agreed in supporting the constitution of a court for 
the purpose of dealing with the differences between landlords 
and tenants in Ireland with regard to rent. 

The establishment of such a court was to be then one of 
the principal features of the new measure. Appeal to this 
court was to be optional, and not compulsory. Every tenant 
from year to year coming under the description of * present 
tenant ' could go before the court and have a judicial rent 
fixed for his holding. This judicial rent was to last, in the 
first instance, for fifteen years, during which no eviction would 
be possible, except for non-payment of rent or distinct breach 
of specific covenants. When the fifteen years expired, land- 
lord or tenant might apply to the court for a revision of the 
rent. If the tenancy were renewed, the same conditions as 



278 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

to eviction were to hold good. In the case, however, of the 
tenant wishing to sell his tenant right, the privilege of pre- 
emption, at the price fixed by the court as the value of the 
tenant right was reserved to the landlord. :^ The Bill acted re- 
trospectively with regard to tenants against whom process of 
ejectment had been begun but not concluded. The Ulster 
tenant, while remaining under the privilege of his custom, 
was to be allowed the protection of the general provisions of 
the Bill for controlling augmentation of rents. The new 
court, which was also to perform the functions of a land com- 
mission, was to consist of three members, one of whom was 
always to be a judge or ex-judge of the supreme court. It 
was empowered to appoint sub-connnissions as courts of first 
instance, to hear applications and fix fair rents. 

The second part of the Bill passed entirely from the region 
of the three F's into the difficult question of peasant pro- 
prietary. The court, as a land commission, was empowered 
to assist tenants to purchase their holdings, and furthermore 
to purchase itself estates from willing landlords, for the pur- 
pose of reselling them when three -fourths of the tenants were 
ready to buy. The court might advance three-fourths of the 
purchase-money to tenants, and was not to be prohibited from 
advancing the whole sum when it saw fit. Tenants availing 
themselves of these purchase clauses would obtain a guaranteed 
title, and would only have to pay a very small sum for legal 
costs. Emigration was to be included among the purposes 
for which advances might be made. Such were the more 
striking features of the new measure. 

The Bill was read a first time without opposition, and 
immediately after, on the following day, the House adjourned 
for the Easter recess. When it reassembled on April 25 the 
second reading of the Land Bill was moved at once. The 
debates were long and bitter. The Conservative party as a 
body opposed the Bill with unwearying vigilance and 
vehemence. They characterised it again and again as a 
measure of communism, of socialism, of brigandage ; and they 
exhausted their ingenuity in efforts, if not to defeat the Bill 



THE LAND LEAGUE 279 

altogether, at least to delay it as long as possible, and to 
iiiiiiimise as much as might be its ' revolutionary ' nature. 
The Irish members, on the other hand, were no less energetic 
in their efforts to widen the scope of the Bill, and make it of 
a character more markedly beneficial to the tenant class. 
Their efforts were more successful than those of the Con- 
servative party. The general principles of the Bill remained 
the same, but its scope was widened, and its powers of 
application strengthened to a surprising degree. The Bill in 
the final form in which it was presented to the House of 
Lords in the end of July, after months of protracted debate, 
might be not unfairly characterised as in large part the 
creation of Mr. Healy and the I>'ish party, of Mr. Charles 
Russell and certain of the Ulster members. 

The sleeper in the Arabian story scarcely underwent a 
more remarkable metamorphosis when he assumed the care 
and dignity of the Kalifeh than was experienced by the new Bill 
in its passage from the Treasury bench to the Upper House. 
It is only necessary to compare the original draft of the Bill 
with its final form to see how important these alterations 
were. The famous Healy clause was constructed to exclude 
altogether the valuation of improvements made by the tenant 
in estimating the amount to be fixed as a judicial rent. On 
the other hand, an amendment by Mr. Heneage was agreed 
to, excluding what are called ' English-managed ' estates 
from the operation of the Healy clause. The court was em- 
powered by another provision to quasli leases contracted since 
1870, which might be shown on examination to have been 
drawn up with a view to dodging or defeating the objects 
of that measure. The emigration proposals, which were 
extremely obnoxious to the Irish paity, were very largely 
modified. The total expenditure for this purpose was limited 
to 200,000Z., not more than a third of which was to be spent 
in any single year. A clause was introduced allowing the 
commissioners to make advances to tenants for the purpose 
of clearing off arrears of rent which had accrued for three 
years. 



280 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

On July 29 the Bill was read a third time in the House 
of Commons, and was carried up to the House of Lords, 
where it was read a first time for form's sake, without 
op].H)sition, the same evening. After two nights' debate it 
was read a second time without division, in obedience to 
Lord Salisbury's counsels. In committee, however, the 
majority in the Lords fell upon the measure. They reduced 
the Bill to a nullity by comprehensive interpolations and 
additions. They altered, they amended, they substituted, till 
the Bill resembled Wallenstein's horse as shown to Brown, 
Jones, and Eobinton. The head, legs, and part of the body 
are new, all the rest is the real horse. The Bill in this ' real- 
horse ' condition was returned to the Commons. The 
Ministry accepted a few of the least important amendments, 
modified some others, and firmly rejected those which struck 
at the vitality of the measure. It was sent back to the Lords 
again, and once again the Lords, with that marvellous 
infatuation which is the peculiar privilege of the Upper House 
in its struggles with the Commons, proceeded to make the 
measure useless by reinstating the objectionable amendments 
and interpolations. The Bill was then sent down to the 
Commons. The Ministry made a further pretence of con- 
sidering the question. The more dangerous amendments 
which the Lords had restored were struck out, bat the Ministry 
made certain concessions. In the first form of the Healy 
clause, for instance, the Government had insisted upon a 
proviso that the tenant should not be allowed the value of 
improvements for which he had been paid by the landlord. 
The Government now conceded the addition *' or otherwise 
compensated.' Under these words, Irish courts can, as in 
the case of Adams and Duuseath, rule that length of enjoy 
ment is to be taken into account as an element in considering 
the value of a tenant's improvement. The Bill was then 
handed back to the Lords. 

By this time public feeling was thoroughly aroused at the 
prospect of a serious constitutional struggle between the two 
Houses. Liberal meetings were held in all parts of the 



TBE LAND LEAGUE 281 

country, at which the Government were vigorously encouraged 
to make no concessions, to fight the fight out to the end. The 
Lords blustered, but their courage was shaken. Two of the 
most comprehensively destructive of tlie Lords' amendments 
had been moved by the Duke of Argyll and Lord Lansdowne. 
.On August 16, when the Bill came before the Lords for the 
third time, Lord Salisbury still assumed a semi-defiant 
attitude. Perhaps on the whole, he said, their lordships had 
better accept the Bill, unless, indeed, the Duke of Argyll and 
Lord Lansdowne pressed their amendments. In tliat case, 
Lord Salisbury would certainly vote for them, and for resist- 
ance to the imperious Commons. But the Duke of Argyll 
was conveniently absent. Lord Lansdowne sat in his seat and 
made no sign. Lord Salisbury had sounded his trumpet, and 
no knight challenger galloped into the arena. So, with 
something of an ill grace. Lord Salisbury bade those of his 
inclining hold their hands, and the Land Bill of 1881 became 
law. The House of Lords had gained nothing by their 
opposition, but, for the moment at least, they were saved 
from the consequences of direct collision with the Commons. 
Mr. Cowen had been a persistent opponent of the coercive 
policy of the Government. He had spoken against it again 
and again ; he had supported the Irish members time after 
time with his voice and with his vote in opposing the Bills. 
At the meeting in Newcastle-on-Tyne, on Monday, August 29, 
1881, he attacked the Government with all his energy and all 
his eloquence. It had been found useless, he said, to argue 
with the master of n^any legions, even when that master 
argued on the extraordinary paradox that the only way in 
which the law could be maintained in Ireland was by its being 
superseded. The Land Act had failed as a means of pacifica- 
tion. It was too abstruse and complicated for plain men to 
understand, and its fair proportions were hidden by the re- 
pulsive screen of the Coercion Act. While he strongly con- 
demned the wild writings and wild threats of the American 
Fenians, he attributed the fault of such writings and threats 
raamly to the action of the Enghsh Government itself. * No 



282 1 RELAX n EIXCE TILE UNION 

more barbarous or inhuman treatment had been attempted 
a^gamst poUtical prisoners in modern days in Western Europe 
than was meted out by the English Government to the 
Fenians. ... By their treatment we converted men who 
might have been our friends into foes.* The outrages in 
Ireland, on account of which tlie Government had demanded 
Coercion, were, Mr. Cowen contended, shamefully exaggerated. 
The reason for the exaggeration was this : the Irish Executive 
feared that a Liberal Parliament would not pass a Coercion 
Bill, and that they could only get it by showing that the 
country was greatly disturbed, and law superseded. They 
therefore made no attempt to use the ordinary law with a 
view to restrain incipient excess, and their strategy succeeded. 
There was no constitutional country in Europe, Mr. Cowen 
concluded, in which such a state of things oblained as it did 
in Ireland. It was a scandal to our civilisation, and a dis- 
grace to our statesmanship. 

The convention at Newcastle was followed up by another 
convention in Ireland, in the Dublin Eotunda, a convention 
of delegates from the various branches of the Land League all 
over Ireland. The convention represented the public feeling 
of Ireland, as far as public opinion ever can be represented by 
a delegated body. The descendants of the Cromwellian 
settlers of the north sat side by side with men of the rebel 
blood of Tipperary, with the impetuous people of the south, 
with the strong men of the midland hunting counties. The 
most remarkable feature of the meeting was the vast number 
of priests who were present. A great number of priests, 
young and old, spoke at the convention ; all were warm in 
sympathy with the League and its leaders ; all were ready to 
deal with the Bill as these leaders wished. Mr. Parnell ex- 
plained his views to the convention. He announced that the 
League was willing to use the Bill as far as it went, but that 
the existence of the Bill did not put an end to the work of the 
Land League ; it had still to be vigilant ; it had to experiment 
upon the newly-founded land courts with test cases, and in 
every way to watch over the interests of the tenant farmers. 



THE LAND LEAGUE 283 

Not of the tenant farmers alone ; the Irish labourers were to 
be thought of as well. The condition of the labourers in 
Ireland was very bad, and their complahits had gradually been 
taking organised shape. They were now formally recognised 
by the League, which became henceforward a Land and 
Labour League. 

The convention was singularly quiet ; the speeches were 
all moderate in tone ; the attitude of the League as repre- 
sented by its delegates was pacific and constitutional. But 
the country undoubtedly was in a disorganised state. The 
fierce anger that the Coercion Acts and their operation had 
aroused was creating a wide-spread disorder, with which it 
seemed at first as if Coercion itself could not successfully cope. 
The Land League leaders maintained always that they had 
the country entirely under their control, and that as long as 
they were to the front they could keep the disorrler and 
violence in check. How far they could have carried this 
out — how far they could have overmastered the forces that 
were now at work in Ireland — it is impossible to say, for 
they were not given the opportunity of carrying out their 
promises. 

The action of the Government during the couple of months 
following upon the rising of Parliament is wholly inexplicable. 
They cannot have thought that the condition of the country 
was dangerous, for they saw fit to set free Father Sheehy, a 
step which it is difficult to believe they would have tal^en if 
they considered the country to be seriously disturbed. Yet, 
before the release of Father Sheehy, Mr. Parnell had received 
in Dublin the greatest tribute of popular enthusiasm that 
had been accorded to any Irish leader since the days of the 
Liberator. He had been attending meetings in the country. 
He returned to Dublin one night towards the end of Sep- 
tember. He was met at the station by an enthusiastic crowd 
bearing torches, and was drawn through the Dublin streets to 
the Land League offices in Sackville Street. From the 
windows of these rooms Mr. Parnell and Mr. Sexton delivered 
speeches to the vast, excited audience, who choked the whole 



284 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

of Sackville Street ; and on the speeches made that night part 
of the Government case was afterwards made to rest. 

Yet it was after this demonstration and after those speeches 
that the Government thought proper to set Father Sheehy at 
liberty, although they must have known that he was scarcely 
likely to remain quieter after his experiences of a prison than 
he was before he entered it. Is it to be credited that the 
Government considered the country to be seriously dis- 
organised and disturbed, and yet deliberately let loose among 
such elements of revolution an agitator who was doubly 
popular, and therefore doubly dangerous, because he was a 
priest, and was regarded by the people as a martyr ? Father 
Sheehy at once commenced a vigorous crusade against the 
Government, and his entry into Cork, in company with Mr. 
Parnell, resembled a Eoman triumph. 

For a while after the session came to an end there ap- 
peared to be a lull in political excitement. The session had 
been so stormy that it was, not unnaturally, hoped that it 
might be succeeded by a lengthened period of repose. 

Up to this time nothing new had taken place in Ireland. 
The convention had been held, and had passed off quietly. 
Mr. Parnell had spoken in Cork and Dublin ; the Land League 
was advising the tenant farmers to wait for the submitting of 
their cases to the land courts until the test cases of the League 
had been decided ; the Land League itself was in full activity, 
and seemed more popular than ever. Suddenly a series of 
events took place with great rapidity, which were more start- 
ling than anything that had preceded them. Early in Octo- 
ber Mr. Gladstone entered upon what was called his Leeds 
campaign. It was, in point of fact, a campaign against the 
Irish Parliamentary party, and against Mr. Parnell in par- 
ticular. On Friday, October 7, 1881, Mr. Gladstone was at 
Leeds receiving an address from the mayor and town council, 
and he made a speech. 

This speech was remarkable for the manner in which it 
singled out a political opponent for all the energy of Mr. 
Gladstone's powers of attack. Mr. Gladstone began by re- 



THE LAND LEAGUE 285 

plying to the Conservative taunts over their victory at Dur- 
ham. In Durham the victory had been won, it was said, by 
the Irish vote, and Mr. Gladstone at once turned to the Irish 
question. After declaring that the condiLon of Ireland for 
generations, perhaps for centuries, its prosperity and happi- 
ness, or its loss of all rational hope of progress, depended 
upon its reception of the Land Act, Mr. Gladstone proceeded 
to draw a contrast between the conduct of politicians of the 
school of 1848, like Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, and even of 
some advanced men of to-day like Mr. John Dillon, with the 
conduct of Mr. Parnell and his followers. Sir Charles Gavan 
Duffy was delighted with the new legislation ; Mr. John 
Dillon,' rather than attempt to plunge his country into dis- 
order by intercepting the operations of the Land Act, had 
withdrawn from politics ; while Mr. Parnell, in carrying out 
his policy of plunder, was doing his best to arrest its action. 
' Mr. Parnell,' said Mr. Gladstone, slightly confusing his 
Scripture history in the vehemence of the moment, desired 
' to stand, as Moses stood, between the living and the dead, 
but to stand there not as Moses stood, to arrest, but to spread 
the plague.' 

Such a speech, made at such a time, naturally created the 
greatest excitement. Lord Salisbury attended a meeting at 
Newcastle-on-Tyne on the following Tuesday, in which he 
pointed out humorously that Mr. Gladstone was unjust to 
Mr. Parnell. * When Mr. Gladstone complains that Mr. 
Parnell has deserted him, I think he forgets it is mainly due 
to the organisation over which Mr. Parnell presides that he is 
now Prime Minister of England. . . . Mr. Gladstone's com- 
plaint of Mr. Parnell for preaching the doctrine of public 
plunder seems to me a strange application of the old adage 
that Catiline should not censure Cethegus for treason.' In 
such terms the head of the Opposition bantered the head of 
ohe Government ; but in Ireland the speech aroused replien 
that had little spirit of banter in them. 

At a meeting in Wexford on the Sunday following Mr. 
Gladstone's speech at Leeds, Mr. Parnell delivered a speech 



286 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

of vehement attack upon the Prime Mmister. It was a 
curious duel of words, unlike anything that English political 
life had been accustomed to : a Prime Minister levelling a 
bitter personal attack upon a political opponent, and the op- 
ponent retorting in terms of equal fierceness. Mr. John 
Dillon was not behindhand in replying to the Prime Minister. 
Mr. Gladstone had held him up as an honourable contrast to 
the conduct of ]\Ir. Parnell, and Mr. Dillon angrily and scorn- 
fully repudiated the compliments of the Prime Minister. He 
had not, he assured the Prime Minister, retired from politics 
to allow free play to the Land Act. On the contrary, he 
deeply regretted that he had not been able to stand between 
his country and the Land Act altogether. 

Mr. Gladstone's speech had aroused the greatest excite- 
ment in Ireland, and, indeed, in England too. People felt 
that such a pronouncement could not have been uttered 
TCiQiely pour rire — that something more was to come of it; 
and something more came. A few days after Mr. Parnell and 
Mr. Dillon had replied to the attack, the Government replied 
by a veritable coup cVetat. A descent was made upon all the 
prominent Land League leaders in Dublin on Thursday, 
October 13. Mr. Parnell was arrested in Morrison's Hotel, 
and conveyed to Kilmainham early in the morning. Mr. 
Sexton, M.P., Mr. O'Kelly, M.P., Mr. Dillon, M.P., Mr. 
O'Brien, and Mr. J. P. Quinn, Secretary of the Land League, 
were arrested in rapid succession, and conveyed to Kilmain- 
ham Prison. Warrants vv^ere out for Mr. Biggar, Mr. Healy, 
and Mr. Arthur O'Connor. Mr. Biggar and Mr. Arthur 
O'Connor got over to England, where Mr. Healy was, and 
orders were conveyed to them from their leader not to return 
to Ireland to certain arrest, but to remain in England, where 
they might be useful in keeping the agitation alive. 

These wholesale arrests startled the whole civilised world. 
Continental countries, used to struggles with revolutionary 
parties, congratulated themselves on the discovery that Eng- 
land, the proud mother of free nations, had her difficulties as 
well as they, and could only meet them with the old methods. 



THE LAND LEAGUE 287 

In England itself the cou^p d'etat was received witli satisfac- 
tion, almost with rejoicing, by the generality of the supporters 
of the Government, though it is hardly necessary to say that 
advanced Eadicals like Mr. Jesse Collings, Mr. Thompson of 
Durham, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Storey, and Mr. Joseph Cowen 
did not share in this satisfaction, and that the rejoicing was 
not unanimous even in the Cabinet. Mr. Gladstone was pre- 
sent at an entertainment given by the Corporation of the City 
of London at the Guildhall on October 13. Mr. Gladstone 
made a speech which might be regarded as the epilogue to 
his Leeds address. In the middle of an eloquent appeal to 
the principles of law and order the Prime Minister produced 
a telegram which he had just received, and in tones of trium- 
phant exultation announced to his hearers the arrest of Mr. 
Parnell. 

The effect was curious. Had Mr. Gladstone informed his 
audience of the conquest of some foreign foe, of the successful 
conclusion of some long and hazardous war, or the consum- 
mation of some honourable and long-looked-for peace, his 
words could not have aroused a greater frenzy of enthusiasm. 
Every man in the crowded hall sprang to his feet and cheered 
till he could cheer no longer. ' Our enemies have fallen, 
have fallen,' said Mr. Gladstone ; and the tumultuous applause 
with which he was greeted from political opponents, as well 
as political allies, must have assured him that he had wrestled 
well, and overthrown more than his enemies. 

Across the Irish Sea everything was confusion. Arrests 
followed arrests ; excited meetings were held all over the 
country; a Ladies' Land League, even a Children's Land 
League, and a Political Prisoners' Aid Society strove to keep 
the agitation alive ; there were slight riots here and there ; 
the Government took the most elaborate precautions against 
a possible popular rising. Suddenly the walls of Dublin were 
placarded bj a proclamation calling upon the Irish people to 
pay no rent while their leaders were in prison. This docu- 
ment was signed by Charles S. Parnell, President, Kilmainham 
Jail ; A. J. Kettle, Honorary Secretary, Kilmainham Jail ; 



288 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

Michael Davitt, Honorary Secretary, Portland Prison ; Thomas 
Brennan, Honorary Secretary, Kilmainham Jail ; John Dillon, 
Head Organizer, Kilmainham Jail ; Thomas Sexton, Head 
Organizer, Kilmainham Jail ; Patrick Egan, Treasurer ^ Paris. 

The No-Rent manifesto was dramatically effective, but it 
was not generally acted upon ; its framers can hardly have 
expected that it would be. The clergy were entirely against 
i'. Even the most national of Irish ecclesiastics. Archbishop 
Croke of Cashel, condemned it unhesitatingly. A general 
strike of rent all over Ireland might have been a great political 
move if it had been possible, but it was not possible. The 
No-Rent manifesto was a direct challenge to the Government, 
and the Government retaliated by declaring the Land League 
an illegal body, by proclaiming its meetings, and by arresting 
its remaining official7MrrDorris, and sending him to Dundalk 
Prison. Many women, members of the Ladies' Land League, 
were put into prison in different parts of the country. The 
most advanced of the national newspapers, United Ireland y 
was shortly afterwards proscribed, and for the time being 
practically suppressed. It carried on a fitful existence, printed 
now in Paris, now in Liverpool, and smuggled over as well as 
might be to Ireland, where it was sold surreptitiously, and 
seized by the police whenever they could lay hands upon it. 
The Government had done their best to stifle the Land League, 
to crush it out of existencj altogether, and they appeared to 
have succeeded. They really seemed to think that by abolish- 
ing an association and suppressing a newspaper they could 
silence a national agitation, and summarily dispose of a com- 
plicated and vexatious problem. 

As soon as Mr. Parnell was imprisoned the Lord Chancellor 
removed his name from the Commission of the Peace for the 
county of Wicklow. An effort was immediately made by the 
national section of the Dublin Corporation to confer the free- 
dom of the city upon Mr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon. After a 
stormy discussion, in which Mr. Gray, M.P., and Mr. Dawson, 
M.P., led the national party, against Mr. Brooks, M.P., who 
opposed the proposal, the motion was lost by the casting vote 



THE LAWD LEAGUE 289 

of the Lord Mayor, Dr. Moyers. The proposal was only de- 
layed. With the new year a new Lord Mayor was elected, 
Mr. Charles Dawson, M.P., a strong Nationalist. This time 
the national party in the Corporation were in a large majority, 
and by a large majority the customary vote of tlianks to a re- 
tiring Lord Mayor was refused to Dr. Moyers, for the part he 
]iad taken in defeating the freedom of the city proposal. This 
proposal was now revived and carried successfully. Such an 
act on the part of the Corporation of a city that had always 
been remarkable for what was called its 'loyalty,' which 
meant its subservience to Castle influence, was in itself deeply 
significant of the hold the national leaders had got upon the 
lieart of the country. But a message from Heaven would not 
have appeared significant to Mr. Forster if it had not accorded 
with his pre-established opinions of the way Ireland ought to 
be governed. 

The suppression of the Land League did not make Ireland 
quiet. The imprisonment of the responsible leaders of the 
national party had removed all check upon the fierce and 
dangerous forces which are always at work under the surface 
of Irish politics. The secret societies, which had almost 
ceased to operate during the rule of the Land League, came 
into play again the moment the restraining influence of a 
popular, constitutional, and open movement was removed. 
Outrages increased daily, and were exaggerated out of all 
proportion to their increase, until, to those at a distance, 
Ireland appeared to be sinking into a condition of hopeless 
anarchy. The Chief Secretary had had his way ; he had put 
into prison men, women, priests, according to his pleasure, and 
yet an obstinate island and an ungrateful people refused to 
justify him by being pacified. Order did not reign in Warsaw. 



290 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

OHAPTEE XXI. 

COEECION. 

The year 1882 opened with a grim sense of disquiet in Ireland, 
of which we find a gloomy record in the ' Annual Register.' 
' Though the Land League was suppressed, though its chief 
leaders were in prison, the condition of the country was worse 
than ever, and seemed to have become more and more hope- 
lessly disorganised day by day. Undoubtedly the imprisonment 
of Members of Parliament like Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, and 
Mr. 'Kelly had succeeded in breaking the power of the Land 
League, but it had done little or nothing towards restoring 
the country to quiet. The members of the many secret 
societies that abound in Ireland had found their favourite 
forms of action terribly restrained by the more open agitation 
established and carried on by the Land League. Now that 
there was no longer a Land League, the secret societies had 
it all their own way, and outrages of various kinds multi- 
plied alarmingly in all parts of the island where the influence 
of these occult bodies extended. A new and dangerous organi- 
sation, headed by a mysterious individual known as " Captain 
Moonlight," distinguished itself for midnight maraudings, 
farm-burnings, mutilations of cattle, and similar crimes. 

' At last the police arrested a man named Connell, who 
seems to have been drifting about the Cork hills and the 
Killarney mountains, dressed in a sort of military costume, 
and levying a kind of black-mail upon the peasantry. Papers 
were found on the man, orders for shooting, and clipping, and 
the like, all signed " Captain Moonlight," which seemed to 
show that he was no other than Captain Moonlight himself. 
Captain Moonlight, to save himself, promptly turned informer, 
gave evidence which led to a great many arrests, and then 
disappeared and was heard of no more. 

• But the arrest of Captain Moonlight did not necessarily 
mean the stoppage of moonlighting, nor the cessation of 



COERCION' 291 

outrages, nor, unfortunately, of incessant rumours and 
stories of outrages of the most exaggerated kind. Arch- 
bishop Croke, the leader of what may be called the national 
majority among the priesthood, declared that a large number 
of outrages were invented or grossly exaggerated for the mere 
purpose of inflaming public feeling and injuring the Land 
League. Archbishop Croke, though a Nationalist, was by no 
means an extreme man. He had never failed to denounce 
wild action of any kind ; he had always used his influence 
for the preservation of peace and order. His opinion, there- 
fore, was well worthy of serious consideration, and it must be 
admitted that while the condition of Ireland was bad enough, 
rumours and exaggerations of all sorts were in circulation, 
with and without intent, which made it appear a good deal 
worse than it really was. 

* Arms were frequently seized by the police, and the 
authorities were convinced that the importation of weapons 
into Ireland was being successfully carried on on a very large 
scale. The two most serious crimes which marked the 
beginning of the year were the murder of two bailiffs in 
Connemara, and the shooting of an informer in Dublin. 
The first of these murders occurred in January, when two 
of Lord Ardilaun's bailiffs, an old man and his grandson 
named Huddy, were sent to collect rents in a part of Conne- 
mara known as Joyce's country, from the fact that through 
constant intermarriages all, or almost all, the peasants of 
the district bear the name of Joyce. Into the Joyce country 
they went, and in the Joyce country they disappeared ; search 
was instituted, the waters of Lough Mask were dragged, and 
the bodies of the Huddys found. They had evidently been 
shot, and then tied up in sacks with stones and flung into the 
Lough. For many months no clue to the murderers was 
obtained, and it was not until the end of the year, at the 
time of another terrible crime in the Joyce country, that 
the murderers of the Huddys were discovered. 

* Late in February an informer named Bernard Bailey was 
shot dead in Skipper's AUey, Dublin, at a time when the 

u2 



292 IRELAND SINCE THE mVTON 

place was crowded with people, when the lamps were light- 
ing, and policemen on duty in the immediate neighbourhood. 
But the assassins were not discovered, and the offer of a 
reward of 500/. failed to elicit any information. Bernard 
Bailey was a labourer who was supposed to have given 
information which led to an extensive seizure of arms by 
the police in Brabazon and Cross Kevin Street, in the 
preceding December. He had received several threatening 
letters, and had, it is said, lived for some time entirely in the 
police -barracks, which he left to go into the workhouse. On 
Saturday, February 25, he went out into the street, and was 
immediately killed. 

* Towards the end of 1881 a proposal had been brought 
before the Corporation of the city of Dublin, by Mr. Charles 
Dawson, M.P., that the freedom of the city should be con- 
ferred on Mr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon, then in Kilmainham 
Prison. The question was fiercely contested, and Mr. Dawson's 
proposal was finally defeated by the casting vote of the Lord 
Mayor, Dr. Meyers. The new year, however, gave Dublin a 
new Lord Mayor in the person of Mr. Dawson himself, and the 
question at once came up again. Dr. Moyers was punished for 
his casting vote by being refused by a large majority the usual 
vote of thanks accorded to a retiring Lord Mayor. Then the 
proposal to give the freedom of the city to Mr. Parnell and 
Mr. Dillon was brought forward by Mr. T. D. Sulhvan, M.P., 
and, in spite of an opposing amendment by Mr. Brookes, M.P., 
on the ground that to do so would be to support the No-Rent 
manifesto, was carried by a majority of 29 to 23. The de- 
feated members of the Corporation talked of further resistance 
— even hinted that as Messrs. Dillon and Parnell were not 
burgesses, they could not legally receive the freedom of the 
city ; but on having it pointed out to them that this argument 
would, if successful, necessitate the removal of the names of 
Mr. Gladstone, of President Grant, and other distinguished 
persons who were not burgesses, from the roll, they forbore 
to press the point, which, indeed, it seems had in reality 
little to support it. The Corporation, or rather the Parnellite 



COERCION 293 

majority in the Corporation, asked the Lord Lieutenant to 
allow Mr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon to attend at the City Hall 
to receive the freedom of the city, but the request was of 
course refused. 

* Though the Land League was suppressed, the Ladies' 
Land League declined to admit defeat. Women had played a 
great part in history before, had marched to Versailles at the 
heels of Shifty Usher Maillard, had disarmed military opposi- 
tion, had conquered a king. Would the Irish constabulary 
be more ungallant than those Gardes Fran9aises ? Would a 
Lord Lieutenant be more difficult than a Louis Capet ? Such, 
or similar thoughts, may be supposed to have animated the 
minds of the Lady Land Leaguers when they announced that, 
in despite of all proclamations and prohibitions, they would 
hold their meetings all over the country on New Year's Day ; 
would meet Mr. Forster at Phihppi. Miss Parnell came over 
from England to preside at the meeting in the League rooms 
in Sackville Street, Dublin, at which there were many 
speeches made, and allusions to the uncrowned king of Ireland. 
Similar meetings took place on the same day in every part of 
Ireland where a Ladies' Land League had a branch organisa- 
tion to raise its head. One or two Lady Land Leaguers were 
arrested in consequence here and there, but practically the 
Government thought it wisest to ignore the existence of the 
Ladies' Land League rather than extinguish it by any violent 
suppression. So the Ladies' Land League lingered on 
throughout the year, until it was finally abolished by the 
national leaders, Messrs. Parnell and Dillon, whom, if report 
were at all well-founded, the Lady Land Leaguers regarded 
with very little favour in the end, as temporising and half- 
hearted politicians. 

' Mr. Forster, of course, was more unpopular than ever. 
Threatening letters snowed on him ; one at least was more 
than threatening, and might have exploded had not aroused 
suspicion taken proper precautions. Yet for all his unpopu- 
larity he was able to make a journey of inspection into County 
Clare, then much disturbed, to go about among the people 



294 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

unescorted, and make earnest, well-meaning appeals to tliem, 
which were well enough received, to support the Executive in 
carrying out the law. It is to be regretted that Mr. Forster 
had not acted more in this manner from the beginning. Like 
most of his acts since he took the office of Chief Secretary, 
it was done too late. The Executive, as advised by Mr. 
Forster, always used the means at its disposal, whether of 
coercion or of conciliation, just too late for either to be of 
effective service. It was no use for Mr. Forster now to go 
among the disturbed districts and make sensible speeches ; 
the mischief had been done, and was not now to be mended 
by any efforts of his. 

' Meanwhile, the popularity of the men in prison only in- 
creased. Dublin had given them the freedom of her city, and 
other Irish cities were not slow to follow her example. Cork 
conferred its freedom on Mr. Dillon ; freedoms came in to the 
Kilmainham prisoners from all directions. Mr. Parnell and 
]\Ir. Dillon could exercise all the privileges of freemen in an 
embarrassing variety of places when once they came out of 
Kilmainham. But when this coming out of Kilmainham was 
to take place, no man could say. 

' A curious bye-election served to show that the Land 
League and its leaders were not losing popularity in the country. 
Mr. A. M. Sullivan, Member of Parliament for Meath, felt him- 
self compelled for his health's sake to resign his seat in the 
early part of the year. The name of Mr. Michael Davitt was 
at once brought forvv'ard, and the founder of the Land League 
Avas elected without opposition. He was not of course 
allowed to take his seat. The Solicitor-General showed that 
as Mr. Davitt was a convicted felon worldng out his sentence 
in Portland Prison at the time of the election, he was by that 
fact disqualified, as O'Donovan Eossa in 1870 and John 
Mitchel in 1875 were disqualified. A new Land League can- 
didpite was immediately proposed— ]\Ir. Shell, formerly member 
for Athlone — and was returned without opposition. 

' On April 2 a terrible murder took place. Mr. Smythe, a 
large landowner in ¥/estmeath, had become very unpopular 



CO EB CI ON 295 

with his tenants, and his Hfe had been for some time threatened. 
On April 2 he was retm^ning from church in a carriage with 
his sister-in-law, Mrs. Henry Smythe, and Lady Harriet 
]\lonck, when he was fired at by three men with blackened 
faces, who made no attempt to conceal themselves, and who 
successfully escaped. The shots missed Mr. Smythe, but 
struck his sister-in-law in the head, killing her instantly. 
The circumstances of this murder were exceptionally ghastly, 
for it had always hitherto been maintained that, no matter 
how unpopular a landlord might be, he was always safe so 
long as he was in the company of a woman, and threatened 
landlords often lived long by availing themselves of so simple 
a precaution. Mr. Smythe wrote a very bitter letter to Mr. 
Gladstone, laying the guilt of the blood upon him and his 
Ministry. Mr. Gladstone replied in a singularly temperate 
letter, expressing his profound regret and sympathy, and 
kindly ignoring the wild personal charge made against him- 
self. Mr. Smythe then addressed an indignant circular to his 
tenants, accusing them all of complicity in the murder, directly 
or indirectly, and telling them that in future the rents were 
to be paid to a non-resident agent, ** who can make no future 
allowances, nor do anything on the property not strictly 
required by law." 

* The fear of assassination led many persons to take careful 
measures to protect themselves. Of all these, perhaps, the 
most characteristic and complete was that of Major Traill, 
R.M., who, in a letter to the Daily Express, gave a curious 
picture of his daily life. He always went about with a guard 
of two policemen, one armed with a Winchester riile, carrying 
twelve rounds ready and fifteen extra rounds in pouch, and 
the other armed with a double-barrelled gun loaded with 
buckshot and eight extra rounds ; he himself carried a revolver 
and six spare rounds, and his groom carried a revolver and 
five spare rounds. At no moment of the twenty-four hours 
was a revolver out of reach of his hand, and his wife had a 
revolver too, and knew how to use it. Being thus guarded 
against any attempts at assassination, Major Traill dryly con- 



296 IRELAND SINCE THE VNION 

eluded, ** The man who attempts my hfe and Hves to be tried by 
a jury is entitled to their merciful consideration as a brave man." 

' But if Major Traill was perfectly justified in taking all 
possible precautions to defend his life or to sell it as dearly as 
might be, there was no such justification for an extraordinary 
circular which Major Clifford Lloyd thought fit to issue later in 
the year. In this document the police were told tha.t if they 
should " accidentally commit an error in shooting any person 
on suspicion of that person being about to commit murder," 
the production of the circular would exonerate them. Of course 
such a document, which practically authorised any policeman 
to shoot on sight anyone whom he fancied might possibly be 
going to commit murder, could not be tolerated by the Execu- 
tive. Even allowing to the constabulary the best intentions, 
it is easy to see that in troublous and excited times harmless 
persons — beggars by the roadside, labourers in the field, 
belated wayfarers, anybody at all — might have been shot down 
by an excitable constable with a revolver in his hand and such 
a circular in his pocket. Between this and any amount of 
such precautions as Major Traill and others like him were 
taking there was all the difference in the world, and the 
circular had to be withdrawn. 

' Early in the year a very remarkable publication was made 
under the official authority of the Irish Land Commission. 
This was the reprint of articles which appeared in the Free- 
man'' s Journal, under the title of " How to become owner of 
your own farm : why Irish landlords should sell and Irish 
tenants should purchase, and how they can do it under the 
Land Act of 1881." 

* Those who thought this heading rather remarkable for a 
work issued with the authority of the Government-appointed 
Commission, found much more cause for wonder on reading 
the pamphlet itself. There they found a vigorous and able 
exposition of the principles of peasant proprietorship, inter- 
spersed with enthusiastic commendation of the Land League as 
" the most widespread, the most powerful, and in its effects, we 
believe, the most enduring organisation of our time," andallu- 



GOER CI ON 297 

sions to the cause for which " Parnell and Dillon and Davitt 
laboured and suffered." Naturally such a pamphlet, issued with 
official authorisation, and at a time when the Land League was 
suppressed as illegal, and Parnell, Dillon, and Davitt were in 
prison, created no small excitement in Ireland. An inquiry was 
immediately instituted ; the pamphlet was found to be written 
by Mr. George Fottrell, an able and rising Dublin solicitor, who 
had been appointed Secretary to the Irish Land Commission. 
Mr. Fottrell, while defending the pamphlet as well calculated to 
advance the cause of peasant proprietorship, which the Commis- 
sion had at heart, immediately resigned his secretaryship, and 
the pamphlet was withdrawn from official circulation at once. 

* The Government had great difficulty in dealing with the 
chief of the Land League journals. United Ireland, and with 
the large introduction into Ireland of the New York Irish 
World, a journal of the fiercest and most pronounced opinions. 
United Ireland was suppressed, and was being seized inces- 
santly, but it continually made its appearance in some form or 
other. Sometimes it was printed in Dublin under conditions of 
great difficulty, and sold or rather smuggled about ; then it was 
printed in Paris and exported to Dublin, where it was generally 
seized on arrival ; then again it was taken over to Liverpool to 
be set up, and introduced from there surreptitiously into 
Ireland. All the activity of the police could not prevent the 
circulation of the paper in some form or another. Week after 
week it kept on appearing, encouraging the agitation to con- 
tinue, and assailing the Government in unmeasurcl prose 
and vigorous cartoons. 

' The Irish World was a much wilder journal than United 
Ireland, and the copies sent to Ireland by post were generally 
seized by the English postal authorities, to the great indig- 
nation of the staff of the Irish World, who inquired indig- 
nantly : '* Is a thick-headed, shock-haired, leaden-hearted old 
reprobate like Forster going to succeed in keeping out the 
light, or are we to see America triumphant and defeating this 
hirsute Forster? " In one sense America, as represented by 
the Irish World, was triumphant, for with all the zeal and 



298 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

watchfulness of the Government, it could not prevent the fre- 
quent mtroduction of the journal mto Ireland. 

' Early in April the rumour suddenly ran through Ireland 
that Mr. Parnell had been released from Kilmainham. The 
greatest joy was expressed at the news, and bonfires blazed in 
every village in the three provinces ; but the excitement was 
allayed by the later information that Mr. Parnell had indeed 
been released, but only on parole for a few days, in order that 
he might go to Paris to attend the funeral of a relative. The 
terms of Mr. Parnell' s parole engaged him not to take any part 
in political matters or demonstrations of any kind, and it is 
needless to add that the conditions were absolutely observed. 
Mr. Parnell did not return to his prison quite as soon as was ex- 
pected, and the absurd scare got possession of some minds in 
Dublin that the Land League leader did not mean to come 
back at all. Such baseless apprehensions were, however, 
promptly dissipated by Mr. Parnell's return to Kilmainham on 
April 24. 

' This temporary liberation was but the herald of freedom 
for the imprisoned Land Leaguers. For some time, indeed, 
the Government had been greatly embarrassed by the necessity 
for , keeping Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, and Mr. O'Kelly in 
prison. The hoped-for reformation in the country which that 
imprisonment was to effect had not taken place ; on the con- 
trary, the country was evidently getting more and more 
hopelessly disorganised ; and, at the same time, the responsi- 
bility of keeping so many men imprisoned merely as " suspects " 
increased daily. Many offers were made to the three leaders 
in Kilmainham of liberation on condition of their leaving the 
country, or even of going across to France for a short time 
and returning to Ireland when they pleased. The imprisoned 
Members declined all conditions of the kind. In the mean- 
time, ever since the temporary release of Mr. Parnell, many- 
tongued rumours had been circulating in Dublin. It was 
whispered that Mr. Dillon was to be released. The statement 
was denied, was whispered abroad again, and again denied. 
It was clear that some curious political event was going to 



COERCION 299 

happen, but few outside the Government circle were prepared 
for the startling character that the event was to wear. On 
]\Iay 2, Ireland was electrified by the news that Mr. Forster 
and Lord Cowper had resigned; that Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, 
and Mr. O'Kelly were to be immediately released uncondition- 
ally ; nay, more, that Michael Davitt was once more to 
become a free man, and that the Government had undertaken 
to bring in an Arrears Bill on the lines of a measure drafted 
by Mr. Parnell himself. 

'What was the cause of this strange Ministerial change cf 
front ? This was the (Question everyone set himself to ask 
and answer to the best of his ability during the days im- 
mediately following the amazing news. The Government 
explanation itself was, one might well think, sufOciently clear 
and reasonable to satisfy curiosity, without any further gropings 
for hidden motives and secret reasons. Mr. Gladstone and 
his Ministry had imprisoned certain men at a certain time 
because they believed it was for the good of both countries 
that they should do so. 

' The condition of the country since had led Mr. Gladstone 
to the conclusion that the ends he had in view for the pacifica- 
tion of Ireland and the settlement of the Irish question would 
be further advanced by releasing the imprisoned Members. 
Mr. Gladstone had been conspicuous all through his political 
career for his willingness to recognise when he had made an 
error, and his willingness to sacrifice those personal feelings 
of pride which have so often led Ministers to pursue an un- 
lucky course, simply because they had began and were too 
proud to draw back. But so simple an explanation would 
not satisfy the wiseacres who always know more of Ministerial 
purposes than the Ministers themselves, and an imaginary 
'* Kilmainham Treaty " was at once invented, in which it was 
supposed that Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Parnell had made 
many mutual pledges to assist and countenance each other, 
and that the liberation of the prisoners was the fulfilment of 
the first article of the convention. Nothing in the subsequent 
history of the year showed anything to justify the assumption 



300 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

of the existence of any such negotiations, even were the 
repeated denials of Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Parnell not to be 
considered sufficiently conclusive. 

' Mr. Forster, however, was entirely opposed to Mr. Glad- 
stone's new policy. Having entered on one particular line of 
action, he was for following it up to the end, regardless of 
consequences ; and he refused to be any party to the new 
arrangement. He resigned, and Lord Cowper resigned with 
him. Lord Spencer was appointed Lord Lieutenant, and 
Lord Frederick Cavendish, second son of the Duke of 
Devonshire and brother of Lord Hartington, was appointed 
Chief Secretary in Mr. Forster's stead. 

' For the first time since Mr. Gladstone's Ministry took 
office there seemed to be a cordial understanding between 
the Government and the Irish party. Each side seemed to 
have awakened to the fact that its opponents were honest and 
honourable men, really trying to do their best, and that the 
welfare of Ireland was the real desire of each. If such an 
understanding could have been arrived at earlier the history 
of the past two years might have been very different ; but the 
impartial observer is compelled to admit that on both sides 
— on the part of the Ministry as well as on the part of Mr. 
Parnell and his followers — there was a certain impatience, a 
not unnatural incredulity as to the good intentions of the other, 
which widened day by day the breach between the great 
Liberal majority and the small Irish minority. Now, how- 
ever, all this seemed to be at an end ; the unhappy quarrel 
seemed concluded. The Government appeared to accept the 
fact that it was impossible to govern Ireland without taking 
into account some of Ireland's ideas as expressed by her 
representatives. Ireland appeared well pleased to admit that 
the Liberal party were as sincerely anxious to benefit the 
country now as they had often done before. All over Ireland 
there was a feeling of joy that the time of trouble had passed 
away ; that misunderstandings had ceased ; that the new era 
had begun at last. Indeed, it seemed like a new era. The 
imprisoned leaders were released, were actually consulted by 



COEUCION 301 

the Government ; the Chief Searetary who, with tlie best in- 
tentions, had succeeded in making himself as unpopular as 
Castlereagh, was out of office ; the reign of Coercion was to 
cease, and new and much-desired legislation was to be un- 
dertaken immediately. It would be difficult to over-estimate 
the good effect that the change produced in Ireland. But 
unfortunately there were men in the country to whom 
reconciliation was hateful, who hated the constitutional 
agitation with all their hearts, and who dreaded nothing so 
much as its triumph. During the suppression of the Land 
League the secret societies which fostered such feelings had 
grown and thriven. While the Land League was in existence 
their influence had dwindled away ; the moment the power of 
the Land League was destroyed, the secret societies again 
asserted themselves and their dangerous methods. So much 
to explain the catastrophe which suddenly destroyed so many 
bright hopes of peace and reconcilement between the two 
countries. 

* On Saturday, May 6, Lord Frederick Cavendish arrived in 
Dublin, to be present at the entry of the new Viceroy, Lord 
Spencer. When the ceremony was over he took a car to drive 
to the Viceregal Lodge in the Phoenix Park. On his way he 
passed Mr. Burke, a well-known Castle official of many years' 
standing. Lord Frederick Cavendish got oft' the car, dismissed 
it, and walked with Mr. Burke through the Phoenix Park. 
It was a bright summer evening, between seven and eight, 
scarcely less light than at noonday. There were many people 
in the Park. Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke were 
walking along the principal road — a wide highway for walking 
and driving, with flat grassy stretches at each side, and trees 
here and there. It seems almost incredible that in such a 
place, a park full of people, and at such a time — the clear 
bright evening of a summer day — two men could have been 
suddenly set upon by armed assassins, and literally been cut 
to pieces without anyone noticing what was going on, and 
without any opposition being offered to the escape of the 
murderers ; yet that is precisely what did happen. Lord 



302 lUELANB SINCE THE UNION 

Frederick Cavendisli and Mr. Burke had got to within a few 
yards of the Phoenix Monument, they were within sight of 
the windows of the Viceregal Lodge, which lay at their right 
a few hundred yards away. Some boys on bicycles who 
passed them were the last to see them alive. The bicyclists 
drove round the Phcenix Monument, passed a cart with some 
four men on it driving rapidly away, and came back to find 
Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke lying on the ground 
dead, and covered with wounds. When the alarm was given 
the bodies were soon recognised, but all trace of the assassins 
had disappeared, and such efforts as were made in the excite- 
ment of the hour to track them down were futile. It soon 
transpired that several persons were witnesses of the ghastly 
murder, who had no idea what they were witnessing. One 
man who was walking with his dogs at some little distance 
off saw what he believed to be a group of roughs struggling 
together in the road ; he saw a couple of men fall and some 
others drive away without any feeling of surprise ; nor had 
he, until he arrived at the spot where the dead bodies were 
lying, the slightest idea that he had been looking at one of 
the most horrible tragedies on record. It is even more painful 
to know that from the windows of the Viceregal Lodge Lord 
Spencer himself was looking out of one of the windows, and 
saw with unconcerned eyes the scuffle on the road some 
hundred yards away, little thinking that what seemed to be 
the horseplay of half a dozen roughs was in reality the murder 
of two of his colleagues. 

• The effect that the news produced in Ireland and in Eng- 
land was one of universal horror. The leaders of the National 
party, Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, and Mr. Davitt, at once issued 
an address to the Irish people and to the world, expressing 
their horror and despair at the shameful crime which had 
brought disgrace upon their country. The manifesto con- 
cluded : " We feel that no act has ever been perpetrated in our 
country, during the exciting struggles for social and political 
rights of the past fifty years, that has so stained the name of 
hospitable Ireland as this cowardly and unprovoked assassi- 



COERCION 303 

nation of a friendly stranger, and that until the murderers of 
Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke are brought to justice, 
that stain will sully our country's name." 

* The feelings expressed in this manifesto were generally 
shared in Ireland. In Cork, a meeting chiefly composed of 
Nationalists and Land Leaguers, passed unanimously the 
following resolution : 

* " That this meeting of the citizens of Cork, spontaneously 
assembled, hastens to express the feelings of indignation and 
sorrow with which it has learned of the murders of Lord 
Frederick Cavendish and Mr. T. H. Burke last night, and to 
denounce it as a crime that calls to Heaven for vengeance ; 
to repudiate its authors, whoever they may be, with disgust 
and abhorrence, as men with whom the Irish nation has no 
community of feeling ; and to convey our condolence with the 
families of the murdered." 

* Similar resolutions were passed in all parts of Ireland, 
and the sincerest regret and horror appeared to prevail all 
over the country. But the murderers could not be found. 

. During the w-eeks immediately following the murder 
the police made many arrests, but in no cases were they able 
to establish any evidence of guilt in the prisoners. Later in 
the year a man named Westgate gave himself up in a South 
American port as one of the murderers, and was brought to 
Ireland to be examined ; but it was soon found that his con- 
fession was false, it being clearly proved that he had sailed 
from Ireland some days before the murder had been com- 
mitted. 

' Mr. G. 0. Trevelyan was appointed as the new Chief 
Secretary for Ireland. The Government immediately passed 
an exceptionally stringent and severe Crimes Act. 

' Whatever the value of some of the powers conferred by 
the Bill might be, proof of the uselessness of " curfew-clause " 
legislation was given in June by two terrible murders which 
were committed long before sunset. On June 8, Mr. Walter 
Bourke and his military escort were shot at from behind a 
loojpholed wall near Gort, and both killed. On the 29th of 



804 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the month Mr. John Henry Blake, Lord Clanricarde's agent, 
an J Mr. Keene, his steward, were shot also from behind a loop- 
holed wall near Lough Eea, and both killed. In neither case 
was any clue to the assassins discoverable. 

' The 15th of August was the occasion of a grer^t national 
celebration in Dublin. On that day the great statue of O'Con- 
nell, cast from designs by Foley, which had been set up in the 
end of Sackville Street opposite the O'Connell — formerly Car- 
lisle — Bridge was to be unveiled. On the same day the 
Exhibition of Irish Arts and Manufactures was to be opened. 
The history of this Exhibition was somewhat curious. Towards 
the end of 1881 the scheme of an Exhibition of Irish Manu- 
factures in Dublin was proposed by some of the leading Dublin 
citizens, amongst whom Mr. Dawson, M.P., the Lord Mayor 
Elect, and other Irish members were conspicuous. 

' These gentlemen ha^ determined that the Exhibition 
should be entirely of a national character, and though they 
would undoubtedly have received Government assistance for 
their scheme, they chose to trust to their own exertions to 
carry the thing through, and they gave considerable offence 
in many quarters by their refusal to solicit or accept either 
Castle or Eoyal patronage for their undertaking. It was con- 
fidently predicted that an Exhibition got up under these con- 
ditions must of necessity be a disastrous failure. Nothing of 
the kind had practically been done without Castle countenance 
ever since there was a Castle, and the experiment was con- 
demned in many quarters before it was attempied. But the 
founders of the scheme were not to be daunted. Headed by 
Mr. Dawson, they certainly worked hard for the success of 
their project, and by August 15 the Exhibition, which was 
entirely the work of the national party, was actually ready. 

' The Exhibition, which was erected at the back of the 
Eotunda, was really a very pretty building of glass and iron, 
and it contained a display of Irish art and manufactures which 
was highly creditable to the artistic and industrial efforts and 
resources of the country. There was some fear that the day 
of the celebration would be disturbed by some fierce outbreak 



COEBCTON 305 

in Dublin, in consequence of the number of persons who 
would come into the city from the surrounding country. Com- 
mendation is due to Mr. Trevelyan and the authorities, who, 
while taking every precaution to be in readiness in case of any 
outbreak, made no display whatever of military or constabu- 
lary force. In Sackville Street, wliere the chief events of the 
day were to take place, there were no policemen visible ; the 
town was apparently left in the trust and charge of the people 
themselves, and the result fully justified t1ie wise action of the 
authorities. All the day the most perfect order was maintained 
everywhere. No rioting or unseemly displays of any kind 
occurred. The great procession, some miles in length, of 
Dublin guilds and trades, headed by tlie popular members of 
Parliament, went its appointed course from Stephen's Green 
through the city, and down Sackville Street to the foot of the 
veiled statue of O'Connell, through streets so densely filled 
by enthusiastic crowds no whit disheartened by an occasional 
rainfall, which indeed served only to heighten the national 
character of the proceedings. The statue was unveiled ; the 
Exhibition was opened and was immediately crowded with 
curious visitors ; and the 'N>]iole day passed off without leaving 
any unpleasant memory of any kind behind it. 

' The next day the long-deferred freedom of the city of 
Dublin was conferred upon Mr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon in the 
City Hall. Some considerable excitement was caused during 
the ceremony by the arrival of the news that Mr. E. D. Gray, 
M.P., the owner of the Freeman's Journal, and High Sheriff 
of Dublin, had just been committed to prison by Justice 
Lawson for contempt of Court. A man named Francis Hynes 
had been tried for a murder and condemned to death. A letter 
was published in the Freeman's Journal by Mr. O'Brien, the 
editor of United Ireland, declaring that on the night before 
the finding of the verdict the jury, who were in the Imperial 
Hotel where Mr. O'Brien was stopping, had behaved in a very 
noisy manner under the influence of drink. The Freeman 
published an article on this letter written by Mr. Gray, and 

X 



1506 IBELAND SINCE THE UNION 

commenting very severely upon the conduct of the jury. 
Mr. Gray was accordingly summoned before Mr. Justice 
Lawson for contempt of Court, and was condemned to three 
months' imprisonment, to pay a fine of 500Z., and at the ex- 
piration of his imprisonment to find bail for 5,000^., and two 
sureties in 2,500/., under penalty of a farther imprisonment 
of three months. Mr. Gray went to prison. Many of the 
Irish members in Dublin immediately went back to London, 
where the Parliament was just drawing to a close, to make 
the case known there ; a proclamation, signed by the Lord 
Mayor and Mr. Parnell, was posted in all parts of the town 
calling upon the people to make no disturbance in consequence 
of the arrest. A public subscription was immediately started 
to meet the fine, which was promptly paid off. To dispose 
of this matter at once, we may say that Mr. Gray was kept 
in prison for a couple of months, and then released by Mr. 
Justice Lawson. The whole matter was afterwards made the 
subject of an inquiry by a Committee of the whole House of 
Commons, which, however, decided to take no action in the 
matter, on the ground that Judge Lawson was within his 
rights and privilege in what he had done. 

' On August 17 a terrible outrage took place in Maam- 
trasma, in the Joyce country, which was coimected with the 
murder of the Huddys in the early part of the year. A party 
of disguised men entered the house of a family named Joyce, 
consisting of a man, his wife, mother, two sons, and a 
daughter, and massacred them all with the exception of one 
son, who was severely w^ounded. The murderers had some 
reason to fear that the Joyce family knew of the murder of 
the two baihffs whose bodies had been found in Lough Mask, 
and might betray it, and they tried to prevent this by a whole- 
sale massacre. Three alleged murderers were convicted and 
condemned to death, and executed on December 15. Five 
others pleaded guilty and were condemned to death, but the 
death-penalty was commuted by the Lord Lieutenant. The 
alleged murderers of the Huddys, two men named Higgins 
and a man named Michael Flynn, were then discovered on 



COERCION 307 

the evidence of an informer, tried, and Flynn and one of the 
Higgins were sentenced to death. 

* During the greater part of August the Irish Executive 
was much embarrassed by what threatened to be, and what 
in certain districts became, an actual strike on the part of 
the Irish Constabulary. The Constabulary had been agitating 
for increased pay and some other reforms in the service. The 
Inspector-General of Constabulary unfortunately characterised 
the conduct of the men, who had rendered the Government 
great service during two very trying years, as " disloyal " — a 
word which roused the greatest indignation throughout the 
whole force, and which had to be apologised for later. The 
Viceroy made several promises of redress of grievances which 
quieted the agitation for a short time, but it soon broke out 
again, chiefly in Limerick and in Dublin. On September 1 
there was an almost general strike of policemen in Dublin. 
Special constables had to be hastily enrolled. For the time 
Dublin might almost have been called the City of Proclama- 
tions, for every wall bore placards — some from the Lord 
Lieutenant calling upon loyal citizens to come and enrol 
themselves as special constables ; some from the Lord Mayor, 
Mr. Dawson, M.P., entreating all citizens to keep order. In 
fact, during this period of the strike the Lord Lieutenant and 
the Lord Mayor figured for a time as rival and hostile poten- 
tates. The Lord Mayor did not at all approve of the special 
constables enrolled by the Viceroy, and was anxious to 
organise a body of his own, and the Lord Lieutenant objected 
strongly to any such step on the part of the Mayor. The 
timely surrender of the Constabulary and the return of the 
policemen to their duty put an end to a very unpleasant 
crisis. There was actual rioting on more than one day, and 
the military had to be called out to clear Sackville Street at 
the point of the bayonet. 

' The extreme Nationalists lost an old leader in August by 
the death of Mr. Charles Kickham. Mr. Charles Kickham 
was an author and journalist who had taken part in the 
Fenian organisation of 1867, was arrested, tried', and sen- 

x2 



308 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

tenced to fourteen years' penrJ servitude. After remaining 
three and a half years in Portland Prison he was released, 
but his health, which had always been delicate, was much 
weakened by his imprisonment, and for the remaining years 
of his life he took no part in Irish politics, but lived quietly 
outside Dublin, occasionally writing a little for some of the 
national papers. A large funeral procession was organised 
to do honour to his remains. 

* Some slight excitement was caused in the early part of 
September by the arrest of Mr. Henry George, the corres- 
pondent of an American paper, and ]\Ir. Joynes, an assistant- 
master at Eton who were travelling together in Ireland. The 
arrest was a mere mistake, and the two gentlemen were at 
once released ; but Mr. Joynes wrote an amusing account of 
the adventure to the Times, and afterwards published a little 
book upon the Irish question, which led to disagreements 
between himself and the head-master of Eton, and to Mr. 
Joynes' s retirement from his position as assistant-master. 

' On October 17 an Irish National Conference was held in 
the Ancient Concert Eooins, Dublin. The object of the con- 
ference was to form an organisation which should unite into 
one body all sections of the Irish party, whether Nationalists, 
Land Leaguers, or Home Eulers. The new body was styled 
the Irish National League, and its programme was undoubt- 
edly of the most comprehensive nature, for, in the words of 
Mr. Parnell, its objects were " national self-government, land- 
law reform, local self-government, extension of the Parlia- 
mentary and municipal franchises, and the development and 
encouragement of the labour and industrial interests of 
Ireland." This formation of the National League on the 
ruins of the old Land League recalled curiously enough the 
historical parallel of O'Connell's societies for the promotion 
of Catholic Emancipation, which the Government was always 
suppressing and the Liberator always re-creating under a new 
name. 

' At first the new organisation seemed likely to cause some 
dissension among the national party. Mr. Michael Davitt 



COERCION 309 

was well known to hold very different views from these of 
]\Ir. Parnell himself on the Land question. While Mr. Parnell 
for the time contented himself with making peasant-proprietor- 
ship the basis of his demands, Mr. Davitt was an enthusiastic 
advocate of the nationalisation of the land, and lie had a con- 
siderable following in the country. Mr. John Dillon, too, was 
supposed to be in favour of more advanced views than the 
leader of the Parliamentary party, and this impression was 
confirmed by the sudden announcement that Mr. Dillon 
intended to resign his seat in Parliament. The cause alleged 
w^as ill-health, and it was indeed well-known that Mr. Dillon's 
physical condition was far from good, but it was immediately 
bruited abroad that there was a split in the national camp. 
A little later, however, Mr. Dillon was induced to withdrav/ 
his resignation at the request of Archbishop Croke, but he 
shortly after left the country to recruit his health in warmer 
climates. Mr. Davitt, though he still adhered to the prin- 
ciple of nationalisation of the land, and advocated it warmly 
on every platform where he spoke, offered no opposition to the 
new organisation, and all appearance of disunion among the 
party Avas averted. But the threatened split proved a tempo- 
rary split among the national Irish across the Atlantic. The 
Irisli World and its followers not only espoused Mr. Davitt's 
theories, but fiercely attacked Mr. Parnell and the Parlia- 
mentary party, while most of the Land League branches 
throughout the States adhered to Mr. Parnell's policy. 

' The Corporation of Dublin were again conspicuous in 
November. One of the body proposed that the freedom of 
the city should be conferred on Sir Garnet Wolseley, in recog- 
nition of his distinguished services in the Egyptian cpaiipaign. 
This was strenuously opposed by the more extreme members 
of the Corporation, and a story was circulated to the effect 
that Sir Garnet Wolseley had expressed a wish for a rising of 
** the Paddies," that he might get a chance of putting them 
down. As the story, though improbable, found many 
believers, some friends of Sir Garnet Wolseley thought it 
worth while to write to him, asking if there was any truth in 



3i0 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

the tale. Sir Garnet Wolseley at once replied that there 
was no truth in it, and added, " I trust I may not live to see 
civil war in any part of Her Majesty's dominions ; but should 
such a calamity ever befall us as a nation, I hope I may not 
have anything to do with it. Although I am not any politician, 
no Irishman could wish to see Ireland loyal, peaceful, con- 
tented, and prosperous more than I do." In view, however, 
of the strong feeling manifested, the proposal to confer the 
freedom of the city on Sir Garnet Wolseley was withdrawn. 

' On November 11a period of considerable absence of out- 
rages was broken, and Dublin society w^as much alarmed by a 
mysterious attempt to assassinate Mr. Justice Lawson. The 
Judge was walking on the north side of Merrion Square, about 
five o'clock in the evening, when one of his escort of four 
men, two detectives and two army pensioners, who always 
accompanied him of late, observed that a suspicious-looking 
man was apparently dodging the Judge. This man was then 
observed to put his hand to his breast, when he was seized 
. by the one of the escort who had first observed him, and was 
found to be holding a loaded seven- chamber revolver in his 
hand. He was at once disarmed and given into custody. 
He was afterwards tried and sentenced to ten years' penal 
servitude. 

* Towards the end of November, Dublin was the scene of 
several more outrages. On the night of November 25, an 
attack was made on several detectives by armed men in Abbey 
Street, and one of the detectives was killed. The next 
evening a man named Field, who had been juror in the trial 
of a man named Walsh, who was executed for the murder of 
a policeman at Letterfrack, was attacked by assassins outside 
his own house in North Frederick Street in the dusk of 
evening, and stabbed several times and left for dead. The 
assassins escaped, and no trace of them could be found, but 
their victim, though his case was considered hopeless at first, 
did finally recover from his injuries.' 



311 

CHAPTEK XXII. 

OEANGE AND GREEN. 

In December of 1882, according to the same authority, the 
Irish Executive had turned its attention to certain speeches 
dehvered by Mr. Michael Davitt, Mr. Healy, M.P., and Mr. 
Biggar, M.P., which appeared to the Castle authorities to call 
for prosecution. ' On January 2, Mr. Biggar's case came 
before the Waterford Sessions, Waterford having been the 
scene of his offending utterances. The prosecution, however, 
came to nothing. Mr. Biggar had made a very violent 
attack upon Lord Spencer, and had passed the severest 
strictures upon the conduct of the jury in the Hynes case ; 
but, however much his remarks might have offended against 
the canons of political good taste, there was nothing in them 
to justify the interference of the law. Mr. Biggar was com- 
mii;ted for trial at the Spring Assizes, after being allowed to 
find bail and give securities in small amounts ; and nothing 
further was heard of the matter. 

' The Executive would, perhaps, have displayed greater 
discretion if they had treated the speeches of Mr. Biggar, 
Mr. Davitt, and Mr. Healy with politic indifference from the 
beginning. Failing this, the wisest course might have been 
to let the matter drop in all three cases. An unsuccessful 
prosecution is, indeed, always bad for an Executive, but it is 
not the worst that can befall it. A successful prosecution 
may sometimes have more disastrous consequences. It proved 
so in this instance. The Executive, fearing that its action 
with regard to Mr. Biggar might make it appear too easy- 
going, determined to push things farther in the cases of 
Mr. Davitt, Mr. Healy, and Mr. Quinn, a secretary of the 
National League. They were called upon to find securities 
for their good behaviour, or to go to prison for six months. 

' To men in their position there was of course no alter- 
native. To have consented to find securities would have 



312 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

been to admit that they were wrong, and to discredit them 
for ever in the eyes of the people to whom they were appeahng. 
In sending them to prison, on the other hand, the Castle 
authorities were only hicreasing their opponents' popularity 
and power in the country a thousandfold. Mr. Davitt had, 
indeed, passed a large part of his life in prison, but every 
fresh incarceration made him more and more of a martyr in 
Irish eyes, and he invariably came out of confinement a far 
more potent political force than he had entered it. Mr. 
Healy, on the other hand, although one of the most popular 
of the Parnellite party in Ireland, was one of the few leading 
Nationalist members wlio had not suffered imprisonment for 
his opinions. It was, dramatically, the one thing wanting to 
his career, and the temporary inconvenience of six months' 
seclusion was but a trifle in contrast with the increase of in- 
fluence and authority which was certain to accompany it. 

' But the prosecutions did something more than merely 
increase the personal and political popularity of Mr. Davitt 
and Mr. Healy. The opponents of the national movement 
were always most anxious to see a split in the Parnellite 
ranks. Such a split they thought had occurred after the 
formation of the new national League, when Mr. Davitt 
made proclamation of marked difference of opinion with 
Mr. Parnell, and was severely censured by Mr. T. P. O'Connor 
for doing so. There did, indeed, seem at moments the 
possibility of the National movement being divided, into the 
two camps of the Parnell party and the Davitt party. But 
any such division, if it existed at all, was completely put an 
end to by the imprisonment of Mr. Davitt and Mr. Healy. 
The necessary intercourse caused by common imprisonment 
between Mr. Davitt and one of the ablest of Mr. Parnell's 
lieutenants was in itself enough to solder close the two powers 
in the national party. In the excitement and enthusiasm 
caused by the imprisonment all small differences were for- 
gotten, and, as a matter of fact, when Mr. Davitt finrJly came 
out of prison, he gave in his adherence cordially to the 
National League, with Vv^iich, at its first inception, he appeared 



OllAXGE AND GREEN 313 

to be at odds. It is, indeed, one of the most remarkable 
things in Mr. Davitt's coiniection with the agitation in Ireland 
that the originator of the Land League has always been con- 
tent to act loyally with Mr. Parnell, and has steadily rejected 
the many opportunities of setting himself in opposition. 

' Of course the Executive could not allow its action to be 
influenced by such considerations as these, if the speeches of 
either Mr. Davitt or Mr. Healy seriously called for strong 
measures. But the offending orations were hardly of sufficient 
magnitude to j ustify the temporary martyrdom of their speakers. 
They had said nothing very new or very surprising, and in 
making an example of them, the Executive only succeeded in 
making Mr. Davitt more popular than before, in raising Mr. 
Healy to the front rank among the politicians of the Parnellite 
party, and in effectually preventing for the time any sugges- 
tion of a split between the followers of Mr. Parnell on the 
one side, and the adherents of Mr. Davitt on the other. 

' The Government was engaged on yet a third prosecution, 
the results of wliich were equally favourable to the Nationalists. 
United Ireland was the pamper of all others in Dubl'n which 
expressed most frankly the opinions of the advanced party in 
Ireland. At the time of the Government descent upon the 
Land League this journal was promptly proscribed, and for a 
long time made its appearance with the greatest difficulty, 
being printed now in Paris, now in Liverpool, and smuggled 
into Ireland as chance permitted or opportunity offered. It 
now made its appearance again, and was as active as ever in 
its support of the extreme national party. Its editor was 
Mr. William O'Brien, a young man of education and ability, 
conspicuous among the prominent non-Parliamentary followers 
of Mr. Parnell for his "irreconcilable" opinions. 

' He had, it will be remembered, come forward at the time 
of the Hynes trial to give his testimony to the riotous conduct 
of the jury at the Imperial Hotel on the night previous to the 
verdict. After the execution an article appeared m United 
Ireland entitled " Accusing Spirits," in which a bitter attack 
was made upon the Government of Lord Spencer. On 



314 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

January 15 Mr. "William O'Brien was committed for trial for 
having, in the phraseology of the indictment, published a 
false, malicious, and seditious libel for the purpose and with 
the intent of bringing the government of the country and the 
administration of the law into hatred and contempt, and in 
order to incite hostility against the same, and for the purpose 
of disturbing the peace of the country, and of raising discon- 
tent and disaffection among the Queen's subjects. 

' At this time Mr. William O'Brien was a candidate for the 
small constituency of Mallow, one of the most peculiar con- 
stituencies in the South of Ireland. It was very small ; it 
was popularly held to be very rotten. During the old Parlia- 
ment it had been represented by a very moderate Home Euler, 
Mr. John George MacCarthy. That a Home Ruler of any 
shade should be able to sit for Mallow seemed remarkable 
enough, but it was pretty generally admitted that a Home 
Euler would have no chance again. At the General Election 
Mr. William M. Johnson, an Irish Liberal lawyer, had been 
elected by a considerable majority over his Conservative 
opponent. When, on the formation of the Ministry, Mr. 
Johnson, as the .new Solicitor-General for Ireland, went down 
again to Mallow, a Home Rule candidate was run in opposi- 
tion to him. The result was discouraging enough to the 
Home Rulers. Mr. Johnson was returned by a larger majority 
than before, while the Home Rule candidate got very con- 
siderably less votes than had been won by Mr. Johnson's 
Conservative rival. Now, in the beginning of 1883, Mr. 
Johnson, having accepted other duties, was leaving Parliamen- 
tary life ; Mallow was again vacant, and the national party, 
apparently forgetful of their former rebuff', were bringing 
forward, not a nominal Home Ruler, but one of the most 
aggressive and uncompromising champions of the principles 
of Mr. Parnell. 

* The struggle was watched by both sides with the keenest 
interest. The defeat of Mr. O'Brien would undoubtedly be a 
very severe check to the aspirations of the Nationalist party ; 
his success would be a decided triumph for them. The issue 



CHANGE AND GREEN 315 

seemed doubtful until the beginning of the United Ireland 
trial. With his committal for trial Mr. O'Brien's chance of 
election became a certainty. Two days after the formal com- 
mittal he was returned at the head of the poll by a majority 
of seventy two votes over Mr. Naisli, the new Solicitor- 
General for Ireland, and the Nationalists had scored their 
greatest success since the election of Mr. Parnell for Cork 
City. The trial itself came to nothing, owing to the dis- 
agreement of the jury. 

' During the week of the Mallow election several executions 
took place, which were the subject of much comment in the 
Nationalist Press and on Nationalist platforms. Patrick 
Higgins, Thomas Higgins, and Michael Flynn were hanged 
for the murder of the Huddys in the Joyce country in the 
early part of the previous year ; Sylvester Poff and James 
Barrett were hanged for the murder of Thomas Brown near 
Castle Island. Considerable belief in the innocence of Poff 
was expressed in Ireland, and a wide-spread sympathy for the 
dead man was finding vent in bitter criticisms of the adminis- 
tration of justice, when a series of events, the most startling 
and the most impressive that had yet occurred in the history 
of Ireland under the new Government, diverted public atten- 
tion from everything except certain proceedings in the Dublin 
Police-court and in Kilmainham Court-house. 

' On January 13 Dublin was surprised by a mysterious 
police raid on various houses, resulting in the arrest of no less 
than seventeen persons, most of them in an humble way of 
life, but one of them, a well-to-do tradesman, and recently 
elected Town Councillor, by name James Carey, of whom the 
year was to hear more. The arrests were made in consequence 
of a series of inquiries which had been going on at the Castle, 
under the peculiar statutory powers allowed by the Crimes 
Act, of examining witnesses without bringing any specific 
charges against individuals, and so obtaining information not 
otherwise to be got at. The seventeen prisoners were at once 
charged with conspiracy to murder certain Government officials 
and other persons. Attempts were made on behalf of many 



316 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

of the prisoners to obtain bail, but bail was in every instance 
steadily refused. Two days later three more men were 
arrested. 

' The news of these arrests created great excitement on both 
sides of St. George's Channel. In Ireland all who belonged 
to the disaffected portion of the community were inclined to 
believe that the authorities had made one more needless blunder 
in arresting a number of inoffensive men, and putting them to 
unnecessary annoyance and indignity by repeated examinations. 
The refusal of bail was regarded as a special grievance, and 
the complaints against the harshness of the Executive were 
many and bitter. Others, however, were more disturbed by 
doubt as to whether the Castle had really been fortunate enough 
to place its band upon any of those unknown criminals who 
were held responsible for the mysterious murders of the pre- 
ceding year. While they lioped, with the London Times, ** that 
there is at length a probability of securing the clue to a series 
of atrocious crimes, perpetrated with a cold-blooded deliberation 
and remorseless purpose not easily paralleled, save among the 
fanatics of Nihihsm," they felt that it did not follow that even 
now the Government was in the possession of legal proof. 
Any such doubt was soon to be removed. On January 20, 
the prisoners were brought before the court, and it was made 
known that one of their number, Robert Farrell, a labourer 
and an old-time Fenian, had turned informer. Farrell's evi- 
dence was startling. Something had always been known by 
the outer world of the Fenian organisation, but Farrell's 
revelations disclosed the existence of an organisation inside 
that, a mysterious inner circle, composed of men carefully 
selected from the larger body, and organised for the assassination 
of Government officials and others. The scheme of this inner 
circle was managed with an ingenuity that would have done 
credit to a Nihilist committee. Its members were unacquainted 
with the bulk of their associates ; each man only knew the 
colleague who swore him in, and who was known as his " right," 
and another introduced by hiiiiself, and who was styled his 
"left." The chief business of this inner circle, as far as 



ORANGE AND GREEN 317 

Farrell's knowledge of it went, was to try and assassinate t]io 
then Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster. Farrell descrihed with 
great coohiess and elaborate minuteness of detail a series of 
plans to take Mr. Forster's life, each of which only failed 
through some mere chance, some bungle in the working of a 
preconcerted signal, or some error in the calculation of the 
hour at which the Chief Secretary's carriage would pass by 
an appointed spot. Farrell himself was never a member of 
the inner circle, nor was he ever present at any meeting called 
for the purpose of planning the murder of any one ; but he 
admitted being implicated in certain attempts on the life of 
the Chief Secretary. He furthermore stated that one of the 
prisoners, Hanlon, had given him a circumstantial account of 
the attempt to murder Mr. Field. 

* Farrell's evidence aroused the most intense excitement 
everywhere. It was whispered abroad that the Government 
expected to elicit from this inquiry information not merely 
with regard to the attack on Mr. Field, but the murders in 
the Phoenix Park, and public curiosity was strained to its 
highest. On the 27th evidence was given implicating Joseph 
Brady, Timothy Kelly, John Dwyer, Joseph Hanlon, and a 
car-driver, Kavanagh, in the Field attack. One of the wit- 
nesses, Lamie, was, like Farrell, an informer who had been a 
Fenian. He gave some curious evidence of the formation of 
vigilance committees to see that the orders of the Directory 
were carried out. One of these vigilance committees had been 
broken up by the fight in Abbey Street, when apparently a 
Fenian, named Poole, was being marked for assassination. 
The work was interrupted by the detectives, and in the scuffle 
that followed Sergeant Cox was killed. 

* On February 3 the inquiry first was directed towards the 
Phoenix Park murders. Knives were produced wdiich had 
been found in James Carey's house, deadly-looking weapons, 
such as are used by surgeons for amputation. The medical 
men who liad examined the bodies of Lord Frederick Cavendish 
and Mr. Burke considered that the knives corresponded to the 
natare of the wounds inflicted. A chairmaker and his wife, 



318 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

who lived at the strawberry beds, identified Edward O'Brien 
and Joseph Brady as being in the Phoenix Park on the day of 
the murder. The keeper of a deerkeeper's lodge testified to 
seeing a car with Joseph Brady on it pass out of the Chapelizod 
Gate on the evening of the murder. Another witness had 
seen Brady and M'Caftrey in the Park on the evening of the 
murder. On February 10 Michael Kavanagh, the car-driver, 
turned informer. His evidence was startling. On May 6, 
1882, he drove Joe Brady, Tim Kelly, and two other men, 
whose names he did not know, but one of whom he identified 
as Patrick Delaney, to the Phoenix Park. There they found 
James Carey ; there Carey gave the signal for the murder of 
Mr. Burke and Lord Frederick Cavendish by raising a white 
handkerchief. Kavanagh saw the murder committed ; then 
his four passengers got on again to the car and he drove off 
as fast as he could, returning to the city in a roundabout 
way. On the night of the Field outrage he drove Brady and 
Daniel Delaney to Hardwicke Street, where Tim Kelly and 
Hanlon were, and after the assault he dro\e Brady and Kelly 
away. 

' But the crowning surprise came on February 17, when 
James Carey entered the court as an informer. This Carey 
had conducted himself all through the ' course of the investi- 
gations thus far with cool effrontery. His position among 
the other prisoners was peculiar. He belonged to a somewhat 
better class in life than the rest. His place on the Town 
Council he owed to the fact that he was an ex-suspect. He 
had been arrested under the old Coercion Act on suspicion of 
being concerned in an outrage in Amiens Street. After his 
release he stood at the municipal elections for Town Councillor, 
and was elected by a very large majority over a Liberal and 
Catholic opponent. 

' His demeanour during the early part of the investigation 
was noisily defiant. He protested loudest when he was first 
arrested ; we hear of him swaggering out of the prison van to 
the first examinations smoking a cigar, ostentatiously dressed 
to mark the distinction between his position and that of his 



OBANGE AND GREEN 319 

fellow-prisoners ; again we hear of him losing his temper and 
assaulting the Governor of Kilmainham Jail. But after the 
evidence of Farrell and Lamie his audacity appears to have 
broken down. He determined to save his own neck at any 
hazard, and he turned informer. 

* Carey, on his own showing, was the worst of the assassins. 
He had lured other men into the organisation, had plotted 
murders, had arranged the Phoenix Park assassination, and 
given the signal when the deed was to be done. It was at 
his suggestion that knives were chosen as the weapons to be 
employed in committing the crime. 

* In 1861 Carey had joined the Fenians, and was a promi- 
nent member until 1878. In 1881 the Invincibles were 
formed, outside the Fenian body, though composed of men 
drawn from its ranks. The oath which Carey took as leader 
of this body pledged him to obey all the orders of the Irish 
Invincibles, under penalty of death. At the head of the 
organisation appeared to be a mysterious person, whose name 
Carey never knew, but who was always called "No. 1." He 
gave most of the orders, he seems to have supplied the money. 
After the attempts on Mr. Forster failed, and when Mr. 
Forster and Earl Cowper resigned, it was No. 1 who settled 
that Mr. Burke w^as to be the victim. 

' Carey's evidence practically closed the inquiry. The 
prisoners were at once committed for trial. The trials began 
in April, and did not last very long. Brady, Curley, Fagan, 
and Kelly were found guilty, the latter after the jury had 
twice disagreed, and were sentenced to death. Caffrey and 
Delaney pleaded guilty, and were sentenced to death. Delaney's 
sentence was commuted to penal servitude for life. The five 
others were hanged. Mullett and Fitzharris were sentenced 
to penal servitude for life, and the remaining prisoners to 
various periods of penal servitude. 

' Carey's evidence failed to connect the Land League as a 
body with the " Invincibles." When it first became known 
that James Carey had turned informer, and that he had ap- 
parently inculpated the Land League in his evidence, public 



320 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

curiosity on both sides of the Irish Sea held its breath. What 
might not come next ! The wildest improbabilities were 
gravely suggested ; the enemies of the Land League exult- 
ingly announced that the time had at last come when the 
secrets of the nefarious body were to be revealed, and its 
flimsy pretence of constitutional agitation finally torn away 
from it, while others went even so far as to hint with unmis- 
takable clearness that the true heads of the Livinciblus would 
now be found among the ranks of the Irish Parliamentary party. 

' These predictions, however, were not verified. Some 
humble members of the Land League were accused by Carey 
of being concerned in the Phoenix Park assassination, but his 
evidence absolutely failed to show any connection between the 
Land League, as an organised body, and the Invincibles. 
Carey accused the wife of a secretary of the English branch 
of the Land League — a man named Frank Byrne — of having 
brought over weapons from London to Dublin for assassination 
purposes, but on being confronted with the woman, who w^as 
immediately arrested, Carey at once declared that she was 
not the woman he meant. A man named Sheridan, who had 
figured in the debates on the Kilmainham Treaty, and another 
named Walsh, who were implicated by Carey's evidence, got 
away to the United States. Frank Byrne and Walsh were in 
France at the time when the disclosures were made in 
Kilmainham Court-house. They were arrested in reply to the 
appeal of our Government, and examined, but were speedily 
set at liberty, on the ground that there w^as no case to justify 
their extradition, and made their way to America. 

' A curious piece of evidence came out in the trial in 
support of the claim made by the leaders of what may be 
called the Parliamentary part of the national movement, that 
their action, far from having anything in common with the 
actions of the secret societies, was actually inimical to these, 
and was in consequence bitterly obnoxious to them. One of 
the assassins kept a diary, in which he recorded from time to 
time his opinions of the political events going on around him, 
and one of these records gave, in clear and direct language, 



ORANGE AND GREEN 321 

full expression to the writer's scorn and contempt for Mr. 
Parnell, and those who, like him, were practising the methods 
of constitutional agitation. 

' The trial made it evident that the death of Lord Frederick 
Cavendish was a mischance, wholly unplanned and wholly 
unintentional. While the horror of the murder was first 
fresh in men's minds, it seemed obvious that Lord Frederick 
Cavendish had been sacrificed by the irreconcilable party as 
an immediate answer to the message of peace which Mr. 
Gladstone was sending to the distracted country. 

' The Government had recalled a thoroughly unpopular and 
unsuccessful Chief Secretary, and were sending in his place 
a young man of ability, of unprejudiced sympathy with the 
work entrusted to him, who was known to be in the most 
complete agreement with Mr. Gladstone. It seemed almost 
certain that his murder was the deliberate answer of the 
secret societies to any attempt on the part of England to hold 
out the hand of fellowship to Ireland. 

' It is gratifying, as far as anything in the hideous tragedy 
can be gratifying, to find that this theory was erroneous. 
The evidence of the chief criminal made it clear that the 
Phoenix Park murder, horrible though it was, was not so ab- 
solutely horrible as it had first appeared. The assassination 
was entirely aimed at Mr. Burke, a man who was well known 
to be one of the most dangerous enemies the secret societies 
had in all the range of Castle authority. He was believed to 
have all the threads of their workings in his hands ; it a /as at 
him the blow was levelled, not at the friendly stranger. Lord 
Frederick Cavendish was murdered not because he had come 
with a message of conciliation to those who would not be con- 
ciliated, but because he was walking in the company of a man 
marked for death. 

' The murderers of Mr. Burke did not even know who his 
companion was — did not learn till later that the brave man 
who had fallen in the effort to save his companion was the new 
Chief Secretary. The levity of destiny shows only too pain- 
fully in the chance which killed Lord Frederick Cavendish, 

Y 



322 TBELAXD SITCI'J THE UNION 

and deepened tlie darimess of the gloom in which the struggle 
between the two countries was going on. But the horror of 
the murder is somewhat lessened by the knowledge that 
the Phoenix Park assassins had not compassed the death 
of one who, judged even by their own dark canons, was inno- 
cent of all offence against the country which, in their error, 
they believed themselves to be serving. 

' One result of the trials was to fully justify the Government 
in any action which had resulted in the substitution of a new 
Chief Secretary for Mr. Forster. However excellent Mr. 
Forster's intentions, however praiseworthy his motives, the 
result of his administration was not success. With all the 
instruments of coercion in his hands, he did not know how to 
employ them properly. It reads like the grimmest of satires 
upon his term of office to know that at a time when the jails 
were choking with the number of Mr. Forster's " suspects ; " 
when, according to his own belief, he had every dangerous 
man in the island under lock and key, his own life was in in- 
cessant danger at the hands of men of whose existence and 
purposes he was guilelessly unaware. Only a succession of 
chances, that read almost like providential miracles, saved 
him, time after time, from men whom a word of his, or a 
stroke of his pen, could at any moment have clapped in safe 
keeping, had he the slightest suspicion of their existence. 
The law gave him power to arrest on suspicion, but he had 
no suspicion of the only body of men whose plans were really 
dangerous, whose actions were really deadly. 

'The informer's own fate was dramatically tragic. For 
some time he remained in Kilmainham Prison. His life 
would not have been worth an hour's purchase had he been 
turned out free into the streets of Dublin, and yet, with reck- 
less effrontery, he wrote letter after letter to the Town Council, 
of which he was a member, announcing that he would soon 
take his seat amongst them again. Meanwhile preparations 
were being made to get him out of the country. He really 
seems to have been unwilling to go, to be deeply angered 
against the Castle authorities for refusing to pay him any 



ORANGE AND GREEN 323 

reward. At last he seemed to be got rid of, to have disap- 
peared ; no one, it was thought, knew whither. Most people 
conjectured that he would be successfully buried from know- 
ledge or pursuit in some Crown colony, or possibly in the 
wardership of some Government prison, where, under an 
assumed name, he might probably escape detection for the 
term of his natural life. 

' Suddenly, one day towards the end of July, came a start- 
ling telegram from the Cape, from the representatives of the 
firm of Donald Currie, announcing that James Carey, the 
informer, had been shot dead on his arrival at the Cape by a 
man named O'Donnell, who had travelled out with him on 
the same ship from England for the purpose of killing him 
At first the news was doubted. There was something grimly 
dramatic about the way in which the informer was struck 
down, that at first people refused to believe it. But the news 
was soon corroborated. O'Donnell was brought to England, 
tried, found guilty, and executed early in December. It is as 
well to conclude the list of the year's executions at once by 
mentioning that on Tuesday, December 18, Joseph Poole, 
convicted of the murder of a suspected informer named Kenny, 
was hanged in Dublin. 

' After the ghastly revelations in Kilmainham Court-house 
there . came a season of comparative quiet in Ireland. So 
terribly had the public ear been crammed with horrors in 
Dubliii, that a series of trials going on in Belfast raised little 
excitement, and passed off comparatively unnoticed. Yet at 
any other time these trials would have roused the keenest 
attention. A murder conspiracy was being unravelled — a 
conspiracy scarcely less deadly than that of Dublin, though 
its aim was the assassination of local landlords ratlier than of 
prominent Government officials. As usual, the evidence of 
an informer was necessary to complete the Government case, 
and a James Carey was found to bring guilt home to the 
North of Ireland conspirators in the person of one Patrick 
Duffy. Ten of the twelve men brought to trial were sentenced 

y2 



324 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

to ten years' penal servitude ; of the remaining two, one re- 
ceived seven, the other five years of imprisonment.' 

In conformity with the habit of Parhament under the new 
administration, a long debate sprang up upon the address. 
People vv^ho objected to the policy of the Government in Egypt 
and in Zululand, or who objected to other actions of the 
Government, or who wished to point out what the Government 
ought to do, expressed their opinions with sufficient copious- 
ness. Mr. Gorst was the first to bring Ireland prominently 
forward by an ingenious amendment, expressing a hope that 
no further concessions would be made to lawless agiiators in 
that country. This at once aroused all the old Kilmainham 
treaty excitement. In these debates Mr. Gibson, as he then 
was, and Mr. Plunket were always in their element. Like 
the great twin brethren who were always supposed to have a 
special eye to the safety of Rome, and to interfere in person 
where the fortunes of the ' Nameless City ' were going badly, 
Mr. Gibson and Mr. Plunket were ever in the van of the 
Conservative battle when an Irish question gave them the 
chance of showing that the Conservative party really had 
some of the old fighting spirit left in them. 

The Kilmainham treaty was the greatest of blessings 
to these two gentlemen. The curious resemblances that 
existed between them increased their likeness to the Dioscuri, 
and lent a piquant attraction to any of their united attacks 
upon the Ministry accused of unholy compact with the Third 
Party. Both represented the same constituency, both were 
clever lawyers, both were exceptionally able speakers, both had 
peculiarly eighteenth-century faces, both prided themselves 
on their gifts of satiric speech, both were endowed with a 
certain quality of theatrical display which enabled them to 
make the very most of even the slightest rhetorical oppor- 
tunity, both were law officers of the Crown under the late 
Administration. 

But just as Castor was not wholly like Pollux, or Pollux 
like Castor, so Mr. Gibson and Mr. Plunket had certain 
points of difference, which serve perhaps only to heighten the 



OBANGIJ AXD GREEN 325 

general similitude. Mr. Gibson was, perhaps, the harder hitter ; 
Mr. Plunket the more poetically minded. Mr. Plunket was 
more showy than solid ; Mr. Gibson more solid than showy. 
On this occasion both speakers were in full force. Mr. Gibson 
attacked everybody fiercely — ^the Government, the Irish mem- 
bers, and especially Mr. Herbert Gladstone, who had made a 
speech at Leeds which stirred Mr. Gibson to a passion of in- 
dignation. The Dioscuri raised the Kilmainham ghost again, 
showed that it had been neither laid nor exorcised by all the 
debates that had been devoted to it, and succeeded in bringing 
up Mr. Forster. Mr. Forster had a peculiar affection for the 
Kilmainham treaty topic. It enabled him to gratify his 
sense of injury against the colleagues who did not properly 
a.ppreciate his worth and his ability. Mr. Forster's speech 
was a long attack upon Mr. Parnell, interrupted at one point 
not undramatically. Mr. Forster had used words which, 
whatever they were meant to convey, gave to their hearers the 
impression that he charged Mr. Parnell with conniving at 
murder. Mr. O'Kelly immediately and impetuously interrup- 
ted him by crying out thrice, ' You lie ! ' and was at once 
suspended. This debate took place on Thursday, the 22nd, 
and the next day Mr. Parnell replied in a brief, quiet, composed 
speech, in which he coldly repudiated Mr. Forster's insinua- 
tions. 

In the course of the debate some ingenious use was made 
by Mr. Forster's opponents of former utterances of his own, 
and journalistic comments upon them. Mr. Forster had 
made a speech in March, 1864, defending Mazzini as a man 
of high character, whose friend he should not be ashamed to 
be, as he was not ashamed to be his acquaintance. This 
declaration was made after long quotations had been read in 
the House from Mazzini 's letter on ' The Theory of the 
Dagger,' in which he had written, * Blessed be the knife of 
Palafox ; blessed be in your hands every weapon that can 
destroy the enemy and set you free. The weapon that slew 
Mincovitch in the arsenal initiated the insurrection in Venice. 
It was a weapon of irregular warfare, like that which three 



326 IB ELAND SINCE THE UNION 

month? before the Eepubhc destroyed the minister Eossi in 
Eome.' 

These were the utterances of the man whom Mr. Forster 
considered of high character, whose friendship he would not 
repudiate. The quotation of these passages was appropriate. 
They were not brought forward to convey the idea that Mr. 
Forster approved of pohtical assassination ; that, of course 
would have been absurd. The intention was to show how 
easily such accusations are trumped up, and also how liable 
English statesmen are to commend, or at least to condone, 
principles of revolution in foreign states, which they view 
in a very different light when they are applied at home. The 
Kilmainhani treaty was not heard the last of in this debate. 
It came up again and again. Whenever adventurous members 
of the Opposition had nothing better to do or to talk about 
they turned to the Kilmainhani treaty, and made it the sempi- 
ternal text for attacks upon the Government. But no amount 
of indignant inquiries or pertinacious onslaughts succeeded 
in eliciting any further facts as to the alleged * treaty.' The 
Government had given its explanation, and declined to amplify 
it to suit the sensational and mysterious suggestions of an 
incredulous Opposition. 

Early in March the Parliamentary party lost one of its 
most remarkable, and certainly one of its most picturesque 
figures, by the resignation of Mr. John Dillon. Mr. Dillon's 
appeara^nce singled him out at once, whether on the back 
benches of the House of Commons, or on the crowded plat- 
form of an Irish meeting, as a man remarkable among his 
fellows. His grave, melancholy face, his intensely dark hair 
and eyes, gave him as we have said a curiously Spanish air, 
more appropriate to those stately faces that smile from the 
canvases of Velasquez in the great gallery of Madrid than to 
a nineteenth-century member for Tipperary. He was one of 
the few followers of Mr. Parnell whose appearance in any 
sense corresponded to the ideal picture of a member of a 
revolutionary party. Those who watched liim in the House 
of Commons felt instinctively that he would have found more 



ORANGE AND GREEN 327 

fitting surroundings in some Jacobin convention, some Com- 
mittee of Public Safety of the year 1793. Mr. Dillon's cha- 
racter did not wholly belie his appearance. He was among 
the extremest of the extreme section of Mr. Parn ell's following. 
His speeches had raised fiercer controversy than those of any 
of his colleagues. The son of a rebel of 1848, he inherited 
all, and more than all, the uncompromising spirit of Young 
Ireland, and he did not, in his early days in the House of 
Commons profess any profound blessing in Parliamentary 
agitation. Thirty years earlier he would have flung himself 
enthusiastically into the movements of the national party ; 
have matched passions with Mitchel ; perhaps have striven to 
emulate the glowing oratory of Meagher, and have followed 
Smith O'Brien from London to Ballingarry, and from Ballin- 
garry to Van Diemen's Land. He should have played the 
father's part, the father the son's. John Dillon the elder 
had a belief in the sympathies of English statesmen and 
politicians, of which his son inherited no jot. Had the elder 
Dillon lived to carry out his cherished purpose of effecting a 
lasting union between the representatives of Irish nationalism 
and the leaders of the English Liberal party, the story of Irish 
politics for the last twenty years might have been very different. 
John Dillon the youngei was rumoured to be at odds with 
Mr. Parnell on many points. People trJjied of him as being 
anxious to set himself up as a rival to Mr. Parnell, as scheming 
to wrest the leadership away from him. Mr. Dillon never 
showed the least sign of any such purpose. Whenever he 
found that his ideas were not in complete unison with those of 
his chief, instead of thrusting himself forward and declaring 
his own views, he simply held aloof and was silent. In the end 
his health gave way, and retirement from political life became 
inevitable. He had desired to resign more than once before, 
but had been restrained by his friends ; now, however, the 
condition of his health rendered rest imperative. Pie resigned 
his seat, and went away to recover his strength in Italy and 
Colorado ; and his vacant place was filled by Mr. Mayne, who 
was of course an ardent Parnellite. 



328 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

In April, 1883, a measure was introduced and passed into 
law with almost unrivalled rapidity. This was the Bill for 
amending the law relating to explosives, which was introduced 
by Sir William Harcourt on Monday, April 9, passed through 
ail its stages in the Commons in less than two hours, was 
sent to the Lords, and received the royal assent the next day. 

There was reason for this unusual haste. Much had been 
said and written for some time by a section of Irish- Americans 
in New York about the introduction of dynamite into the 
political difficulties between England and Ireland. Threats 
to blow up London buildings were uttered at meetings of tlie 
advocates of dynamite, and printed in their journals, but at 
first little heed v^as paid to these utterances. On the night 
of Thursday, March 15, 1883, however, an attempt was made 
to blow up the offices of the Local Government Board at the 
corner of Whitehall and Charles Street. No great damage 
was done, and no lives were lost, but a great many windows 
were broken. The wall and one room of the Local Govern- 
ment Offices were considerably shattered, and for a time con- 
siderable alarm was created. A simultaneous attempt to blow 
up the Times office failed through the fortunate accidental 
overturning of the infernal machine used, which prevented it 
from operating. The same attempted explosions by dynamite 
in Glasgow appeared to be in fulfilment of these threats, but 
they did not arouse much public excitement. The Govern- 
ment immediately offered the reward of 1,000/. for the ap- 
prehension of the criuiinals, but no clue was obtanied, and 
no information given. 

It was confidently expected that the attempts would be 
repeated, and every precaution was taken. At all the public 
offices, important public buildings, and the residences of 
statesmen, a military guard was placed, or where it existed 
before was doubled. For some little time after the event 
London presented an unwontedly military air. The presence 
of so many soldiers in places where formerly no other guardian- 
ship than that of the policeman was required lent London 
something of the appearance of a Continental city. These 



ORANGE AM) GREEN 329 

precautions, however, were not long maintained, and in a 
short while London resumed its wonted aspect. The dyna- 
mite difficulty was not at an end, unfortunately. In the first 
week in April, 1883, the police succeeded in discovering a 
conspiracy, in arresting eight men concerned, and in seizing 
a large quantity of nitro- glycerine, which was manufactured 
in Birmingham, and was being secretly conveyed to London. 

It was impossible to identify the men arrested with the 
perpetrators of the attempt upon the Local Government 
Board and the Times office. But their connection with the 
Irish-American advocates of dynamite was clearly esttiblished. 
To meet what seemed like a wide-spread conspiracy the Ex- 
plosives Bill was hurried through Parliament. Four of the 
prisoners were sentenced to penal servitude for life : two were 
acquitted. These sentences and the comprehensive powers 
of the new measure did not, however, prevent further dyna- 
mite crimes. The police made seizures of nitro -glycerine in 
Leicester, and in Cupar, in Fife. Men were arrested in 
Glasgow on the charge of being concerned in the outrages of 
January. Four men were sentenced to penal servitude for 
life for introducing explosive substances into England at 
Liverpool. On October 30, 1883, two explosions took place 
on the Metropolitan Eailway : one between ¥/estminster and 
Charing Cross, the other between Praed Street and Edgware 
Eoad. Both occurred almost at the same time, about eight 
o'clock in the evening ; both did considerable damage to pro- 
perty, and many human beings were injured, though no one 
fatally. No trace of the perpetrators of this outrage was 
discovered. 

Towards the end of February in 1884 a yet bolder outrage 
was attempted, which happily only partially succeeded. At a 
little after one on the morning of Tuesday , February 26, an 
explosion took place in the luggage-room of Victoria Station, 
which wrecked a large part of the station, and destroyed a 
considerable amount of property. Though it was at once 
assumed that this was part of a dynamite plot, the destruction 
of everything in the luggage-room was so great that absolute 



330 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

proof might have been difficult to obtain. The discovery of 
infernal machines at Charing Cross, Ludgate Hill, and Pad- 
dington stations supplied the necessary proofs. In the luggage- 
room of each of these stations a portmanteau was discovered 
containing a large quantity of dynamite connected with a 
pistol and a clock timed to go oif at a certain hour. In each 
of these cases the defective nature of the machinery employed 
had happily prevented catastrophes which would in all prob- 
ability have been far more dangerous than that at Victoria 
Station. An attempt was made later on Blackfriars Bridge. 
Early in 1885 two explosions took place in Westminster, one 
in the great hall and one in the chamber of the House, which 
did great damage and seriously injured two policemen. 

No language can be too strong in condemnation of these 
criminal attempts. The freedom and the future of Ireland 
are not to be worked out by means abhorrent to all Christian 
men. Every Nationalist, every one who believes that the 
hour of Ireland's regeneration is daily, even hourly, drawing 
nearer, who believes that in the immediate future the Parliament 
of Ireland will be restored to her, can only feel horror at such 
deeds. The cause of Ireland is not to be served by the knife 
of the assassin and the infernal machine of the dynamitard. 

' In the month of May a fresh stimulus to popular excite- 
ment was given by the case of the Kerry Sentinel. The 
proprietor of this paper was Mr. Timothy Harrington, who 
had suffered imprisonment in the preceding year for a speech 
he delivered, and who was rewarded for his imprisonment by 
being elected to represent Westmeath in Parliament, while 
still confined in Mullingar Jail. The offence with Vv4hch the 
paper was charged was the issue of certain seditious proclama- 
tions alleging to emanate from the " Invincibles," calling upon 
the people to assemble in a particular place for the purpose 
of being sworn in, and threatening those who refused with 
the fate of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke. The 
sub-inspector of constabulary who examined this document 
noticed that there were some lines at the top, impressed by 
type but not marked in ink. which had evidently nothing to 



v 



ORANGE AND GREEN 331 

do with the purport of the proclamation. On carefully in- 
vestigating these lines, he read the words, " Yours very truly, 
Michael Davitt." As a letter from Mr. Michael Davitt had 
appeared in the Kerry Sentinel and in no other local paper, 
the sub-inspector at once concluded that the "Invincible'* 
manifesto had been printed in the offices of the Kerry Sentinel, 
He accordingly directed the seizure of the newspaper under 
the powers allowed him by the Crimes Act. Mr. Edward 
Harrington, editor of the paper and brother of the proprietor, 
with a number of his compositors, was prosecuted. The case 
of the defence was that the document, though undoubtedly 
printed in the offices of the Kerry Sentinel, was so printed 
without the knowledge of any of the responsible authorities 
of the paper ; that it was done in all probability as a joke, as 
otherwise the offenders would scarcely have been careless 
enough to let it be so easily known where the proclamation 
was printed, or where the alleged meetings of *' Invincibles " 
were to take place. 

* Mr. Edward Harrington, however, and his foreman were 
sentenced to six months' imprisonment, and two compositors 
to two months' imprisonment each. Energetic efforts were 
made in Parliament by Mr. Harrington and his friends to 
have the sentence mitigated, but the efforts were unsuccessful, 
and Mr. Harrington suffered the full term of his imprisonment, 
not being set at liberty until early in the following January. 

' Curious proof of Mr. Parnell's increased popularity was 
given in July. On June 4 Mr. Healy, together with Mr. 
Davitt and Mr. Quinn, was allowed to leave Richmond 
Prison, after serving four out of the six months of imprison- 
ment ordered in the sentence. A month later Mr. Healy 
was elected member for Monaghan county, one of the strong- 
holds of Ulster. Six months earlier, any one who should 
have said that it would be possible for a Parnellite politician 
to represent an Ulster county would have been laughed at 
heartily for his folly ; but the seemingly impossible had come 
10 pass. 

' The choice of the Nationalist candidate was in itself 



332 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

peculiar. Instead of attempting the attack upon Ulster with 
some mild-mannered politician, the Nationalists put forward 
one of the most extreme and uncompromising of Mr. Parnell's 
lieutenants. Mr. Healy had, however, special qualifications 
for the position. He was well known to be a master of the 
Land Act, to have worked long and hard at it in the House 
of Commons, and to be the author of the Healy clause. He 
had been personally complimented at Westminster by the 
Prime Minister himself upon his knowledge of that measure, 
a knowledge not only far beyond that of his own leader, or 
of any of his colleagues, but said at the time to be beyond 
that of any member of the House, with the exception of Mr. 
Gladstone himself, and of Mr. Law. When Monaghan was 
left vacant by the resignation of Mr. Litton, appointed to a 
place of profit under the Crown, the Nationalists resolved 
to contest the seat, and to put Mr. Healy forward as their 
champion. 

' The campaign was skilfully managed. Mr. Healy went 
through the county Monaghan, accompanied by Mr. Parnell, 
making speeches everywhere on the Land question. Little 
was spoken of beyond the services rendered by Mr. Healy 
to the Land Bill, and the strong necassity that existed for 
still further amending and improving that measure. Vexed 
questions were kept in the background ; the Land question 
alone was insisted upon, and on the Land question Monaghan 
county was won for the Parnell party. A very little later, 
seat after seat in Ulster was to be won upon Home Rule and 
Home Eule alone. The feelings with which this victory were 
regarded in England were sufficiently represented by a cartoon 
in Punch, in which Mr. Parnell was represented as cutting 
a square piece marked Monaghan out of Mr. John Bull's 
overcoat, and observing, " Bedad, I've been and spoilt his 
Ulster anyhow." 

* Mr. Healy's vacant place in Wexford was immediately 
filled by Mr. Redmond, brother oi the member for New Ross, 
who was elected in his absence, by a large majority over the 
Liberal candidate, The O'Connor Don, an Irish gentleman of 



OBANGE AND GREEN 333 

old family and great position in Wexford. Mr. Redmond, 
the newly-elected member, was an exceedingly young man, 
not long of age.' At the time of his election he was in 
Australia with his brother, carrying on an active campaign 
in favour of the national cause.' The Parnellite party was 
strengthened later on in the year by the return of Mr. Small 
for Wexford county, of Mr. Lynch for Sligo county, and of 
Mr. McMahon foi Limerick. 

' On July 4 a banquet was given by the Mayor and Corpo- 
ration of Cork to celebrate the opening of the Lidustrial 
Exhibition. The city of Cork had been very anxious to 
obtain the privilege of being the scene of the Royal Agricul- 
tural Society's Show for 1883. When, however, it was de- 
cided that the Agricultural Show was to be held in Limericl:, 
the Cork Corporation resolved to hold an Lidustrial Exhibition, 
as some compensation to themselves and their fellow- towns- 
men for the loss of the other attraction. The arrangements 
for the Exhibition were successfully carried out ; it was 
opened by Lord Bandon with great success on July 2, and 
the banquet was the justifiable celebration of a well- organised 
and happily- completed enterprise. 

* It was not a little curious to find the name of Mr. Parnell 
prominent among the distinguished guests, who included 
Lord Bandon and the Earl of Dunraven, as well as moderate 
Home Rulers like Mr. Shaw and Colonel Colthurst, who had 
but little reason to love the party which Mr. Parnell repre- 
sented. That Mr. Parnell should be present at the banquet 
was only natural ; he was member for the city, and the Mayor 
and Corporation were strongly national. But it was surprising 
to find men of such markedly different opinions, prominent 
members of the landlord class, which it was Mr. Parnell's 
aim to destroy, consenting to take part in any ceremony in 
which he had a share. The fact, slight though it was, served 
to show how very much the position of Mr. Parnell had been 
strengthened of late. 

' Early Ih August the Government, after pleasing one party 
in Ireland by the Tramways Act, succeeded in giving more 



334 IRELAND 8TXCB THE UNION 

general satisfaction by accepting the tender of the City of 
Dubhn Steam Packet Company for the carriage of the mails 
as heretofore between H :)lyhead and Kingston. This fine line 
of boats was exceedingly popular with those whose business 
in life frequently called upou them to cross St. George's 
Channel, and there was general discontent expressed in Ireland 
when it was announced that the Government, in renewing the 
contract for the carriage of the mails, was about to accept the 
tender of another company, whose boats might be less suitable 
for passenger traffic. The dissatisfaction was so general that 
the Government consented to reconsider its decision, and the 
result was that the contract was renewed with the original 
Company. It was a curious experience for the Government 
to have to deal with a question on which practically the whole 
of Ireland was in agreement, and they undoubtedly acted 
wisely in taking a step which- gave satisfaction to Irishmen of 
every variety of political party or opinion. 

* By the death of Mr. Hugh Law in September, the Govern- 
ment lost a zealous and valuable public servant, and the Irish 
Lord Chancellorship one of the ablest holders of that office. 
Mr. Law's name will be especially remembered for the signal 
service he rendered to two Liberal Governments, first by his 
drafting of the Bill disestabhshing the Church in Ireland, and 
secondly by his drafting and management of the Land Bill of 
1880.' 

Towards the end of the year the old Orange and Green 
feud was revived in Ireland with peculiar animosity. It had 
never, indeed, died out, but of late years its old ferocity seemed 
to have faded. Ever since 1795, when the first Orange lodge 
was founded in Armagh, after the ' Battle of the Diamond,' 
Orangeism had become an important factor in the political 
situation of Ireland. The Orangemen were the legitimate 
successors of the old English ' garrison,' of the chivalry of 
the Pale, of the Cromwellians of the plantations, of the 
Scotch ' settlers.' The guiding principle of Orangeism was 
antagonism to Catholicism. It supported the Penal Laws 
while they still existed ; it struggled hard argainst their repeal ; 



ORANGE AND GREEN 335 

it represents to-day the spirit which animated and inspired 
the Penal Laws. 

The entertaining inspector of pohce who has introduced 
himself to contemporary literature as ' Terence M'Grath,' 
gives, in his * Pictures from Ireland,' a sketch of a typical 
Orangeman, which, coming from such a source, cannot be 
considered to be biassed by any undue prejudice against the 
Orange institutions. ' From the time when he was old 
enough to throw a stone at a Catholic procession on Patrick's 
Day, the most stirring incidents of McGettigan's life have 
been connected v/ith the annual commemoration of the twc 
victorious engagements fought by the much-lauded and sorely 
execrated monarch. . . . The village of Juliansborough is a 
well-known Protestant stronghold ; and, though a Pioman 
Catholic chapel stands about half a mile away, no one of that 
benighted faith would have the audacity to pass through the 
village to his devotions during the month of July. . . . The 
principles of the Orange Society are " civil and religious 
liberty," and McGettigan flatters himself that he adopts them 
to the fullest extent. . . . But with "■ Papishers " it is a dif- 
ferent thing. That every one of these followers of the Scarlet 
Woman is destined to eternal perdition is as firm an article 
of belief with William McGettigan as that the evening and 
the morning were the first day ; and he feels that, in doing 
all that in him lies to obstruct the religious practices of 
Popery, and otherwise make the lives of the Papishers a 
burden to them, he is simply doing his duty as a good citizen. 
. . . Patrick's Day passed, McGettigan bears no violent malice 
against his Catholic neighbours. He has even walked to 
market on more than one occasion with members of that faith. 
But with the heat of June his sentiments become less dormant, 
and with the first of July sets in a period of intolerance that, 
for thirty days at least, subverts his reason. 

' During this time a Sister of Mercy with a cu :> of water 
in the desert would be an unwelccme sight ; and a general 
inclination to wade knee-deep in Catholic blood is acco npanied 
by a worship of the Orange lily as real as the "idolatry" 



^'^e IIlELAyD SINCE THE UNION 

that he so bitterly condemns. . . . The clergyman of his 
church has a certain influence with him, but it is in exact 
opposition to that pastor's attitude towards the Orange Society. 
The basis of his faith is the warrant and rules of his lodge, 
and while cursing his Eoman Catholic opponents he never 
imagines that his religion is as much a religion of hatred as 
the gloomy frenzy of the Puritans or the tribal ferocity of the 
ancient Jews. ... In his political principles he is torn by 
conflicting emotions. . . . He approves of tenant right, fixity 
of tenure, freedom of sale, and vote by ballot. So far he is 
Liberal, but he votes with the Conservatives ; for is not the 
extension of the franchise a Liberal proposal that would, in 
proportion to the lowness of level at which the line is drawn, 
increase the number of Catholic votes ? And did not the 
Liberals disestablish the Church that seemed to McGettigan 
an evidence of Protestant ascendency that gratified his vanity, 
and assented to the principles of the Orange Society, in which 
all sections of Protestants could meet on common grounds ? 
McGettigan calls himself a thorough Loyalist, but his feelings 
towards England are exactly identical with his feelings and 
attitude towards the Church. He is loyal to Protestant 
England because she represents to him Protestantism versus 
Popery. If she became Roman Catholic he would hate her 
with all his heart ; and if she grants Home Rule he will vote 
for the removal of the Union Jack from Orange processions.' 
Such is the picture, drawn in no unfriendly spirit, by a writer 
as bitterly opposed to the national party as McGettigan him- 
self, of the Orange agitation of the North of Ireland, the 
member of a secret society as fatal in its way to the well-being 
of the country as the Ribbon lodges themselves. How little 
the loyalty of the Orange Society could be depended upon was 
shown in 1835, when the Orange plot to place the Duke of 
Cumberland upon the throne instead of Queen Victoria was 
discovered and defeated. 

' Mr. Parnell's victory at Monaghan aroused the greatest 
excitement in the North of Ireland. The Orange lodges were 
resolved to challenge Mr. Parnell's alleged pov/er in Ulster, 



OkANGE AND QitEEN 33t 

and whenever a Nationalist meeting was organic 3d for any 
Ulster town an opposition Orange meeting was got up for the 
same time and place. Such demonstration and counter- 
demonstration on the part of the Green and Orange parties 
was in the highest degree prejudicial to the public peace. 
For generations the hostility between Orange and Green had 
run too fiercely to be smoothed down by the soft-spoken lyric 
of Thomas Davis, and the feeling had now been exceptionally 
stimulated by what the Orange lodges regarded as the Par- 
nellite invasion of Ulster. In the month of September 
Orange and Green meetings were held at Dungannon and 
Omagh, and only the effective presence of military and con- 
stabulary prevented some serious breach of the peace. 

' At this critical juncture Sir Stafford Nortlicote, as leader 
of the Opposition, undertook a crusade into Ulster against the 
Irish policy of the Government. The English Conservative 
press commended Sir Stafford Northcote highly for repeating 
Mr. Gladstone's Midlothian tactics in Ulster ; while Liberal 
journalism contented itself chiefly with good-humouredly 
bantering the leader of the Opposition on his Irish crusade. 
Sir Stafford Northcote was never meant to be an agitator, nor 
were his crusade speeches in themselves of a very dangerous 
character. But they succeeded in arousing all the old party 
passions. The Monaghan election had been a severe blow to 
the Orange garrison in Ulster, and they were eager to efface 
its recollection by any means in their power. Orange riots 
followed Sir Stafford Northcote's progress through the North 
of Ireland. In one of these a convent in Belfast was attacked, 
and the lady superior, who was ill, died of the alarm and the 
excitement. Sir Stafford Northcote and the speakers who 
accompanied him inflamed the Orange mobs they addressed, 
not merely against the Nationalist party, but against the 
Government which supported, abetted, and basely yielded to 
the demands of the national party. The very fact of such a 
crusade being undertaken roused the Orange lodges to enthu- 
siasm. Other speakers, less temperate and judicious than 
Sir Stafford Northcote, did much by impetuous and unreasoned 



S38 IRELAND SI^CE THE XINION 

harangues to rouse the spirit of faction, and for a time the 
situation in Ulster almost suggested the beginning of a civil 
war. 

'Whenever a Nationalist meeting was called a counter 
Orange demonstration was summoned, and in spite of all the 
efforts of the authorities violent physical contests often took 
place between the followers of the two factions.' The Orange 
party were inspired by the double purpose of fighting the 
Nationalists and harassing the Government. Whenever a 
national meeting was announced to be held in Ulster the 
Orange party immediately organised a counter-meeting, to 
oppose what they chose to call the invasion of their county. 

To appreciate properly the situation, it must be remem- 
bered that even in Orange Ulster something like half of the 
population were Catholics, and that when the new franchise 
came into effect the majority of votes would no longer be the 
privileged possession of the supporters of the Orange lodges. 
The Nationalist leaders always found in Ulster large audiences 
of Nationahsts ; Mr. Healy's election for Monaghan showed 
that Orangeism could not always turn the scale against the 
men who had made the Land agitation. It was perfectly clear 
that if National and Orange meetings Were held on the same 
day and in the same locality without precautions, it would be 
impossible to preserve peace. The Orange leaders wrote and 
spoke in a way which showed that they were determined to 
rival the wildest utterances ever made on the national side. 
A national meeting was announced to be held in Kosslea, in 
Fermanagh, on October 16, 1883. Lord Kossmore, the Grand. 
Master of the Orangemen of the county Monaghan, and a 
justice of the peace, signed a proclamation calling upon the 
Orangemen to oppose the meeting. It was evident that a 
crisis was at hand, and the Irish Executive poured a large force 
of military and police into the district, who succeeded in 
keeping the two crowds apart in spite of the attempts of Lord 
Eossmore to bring about a collision. 

The account of the proceedings of the Orange meeting on 
that day is extraordinary. * Some pistol-shots were fired into 



ORANGE AND GREEN 3B9 

the air in the outskirts of the crowd, and immediately the fire 
was taken up by several hundred persons throughout that va^t 
assemblage. Pistols and revolvers were produced on all sides, 
and a continuous fusillade was maintained for nearly fifteen 
minutes. The leaders endeavoured to stay the deafening 
discharge, but for some time without effect.' Lord Crichton 
and other Orange leaders on the platform were obliged to stoop 
down for fear of being shot by their own adherents. ' When 
the excitement subsided several Protestant clergymen came 
to Lord Crichton and asked him could he prevail on the 
Orangemen to stop firing. Lord Crichton, spreading out his 
hands, called out in as loud a voice as he was able to com- 
mand, "For God's sake, men, will you listen to what I say, 
and stop the firing? " ' Lord Eossmore's speech, which was 
interrupted at one point for some ten minutes by the firing of 
hundreds of revolvers, was specially violent. ' He thought it 
was a great pity that the so-called Government of England 
stopped loyal men from assembling to uphold their institutions 
here, and had sent down a handful of soldiers, whom they 
could eat up in a second or two if they thought fit.' For 
Lord Eossmore's conduct he was removed from the commis- 
sion of the peace by the Government, to the great indignation 
of the Orange lodges and their leaders. The tenor of Orange 
talk became more violent. A circular, signed by Captain 
Charles Alexander, advised the Orangemen in every district 
to enrol themselves into an armed volunteer force, to provide 
stores of arms, and to create, in fact, a complete military 
organisation. Lord Enniskillen, the Orange Grand Master, 
repudiated the circular on the ground that it contained ' pro- 
posals of an illegal character ; ' but the fact that such a cir- 
cular could have been issued, and such proposals seriously 
entertained, is in itself sufficiently curious. 

' The Executive did their best to deal with the serious diffi- 
culty in an impartial manner. Whenever it was considered 
that meetings thus organised and counter-organised would lead 
to disturbance, they adopted the plan of proclaiming both 
meetings. One prominent Orangeman, Lord Eossmore, who 

z2 



:U0 IBELAND SINGE THE UNION 

had distinguislied himself by his efforts to disturb the peace, 
and by his defiance of the law's authority, was promptly re- 
moved from his position as justice of the peace — a step which, 
while it roused the greatest anger in the Orange lodges, served 
to show even the most extreme of its opponents that the 
Executive was holding its scales with justice, and was pre- 
pared to tolerate no infringement of the law from any political 
party in the island. 

' The English press on the whole was pretty unanimous in 
its condemnation of the action of the Orange leaders. The 
journals devoted to the Ministry were, naturally, especially 
warm against a series of assaults directed quite as much 
against the existing Government as against the Irish Nation- 
alists ; and even the most strenuous journalistic adherents of 
the Opposition were compelled to censure the manner in wliich 
the politicians of the school of Lord Kossmore had chosen to 
defend their principles. A paper like Punch, which miy be 
regarded as expressing pretty fairly what the bulk of the 
country feels at any given moment on any given question, 
was especially severe in its condemnation of the Orange policy, 
and of the professing loyalty which was even more dangerous 
to law and order than avowed disloyalty. 

' When the year ended the situation in Ulster was still 
unsettled. Lord Eossmore, smarting under his dismissal from 
the justiceship of the peace, was becoming more violent than 
ever in his attacks upon the Government. Orange manifestoes 
of exceptionally warlike character were freely circulated, and 
a pair of meetings, Nationalist and Orange, which were 
announced to be held at Dromore on the first day of the new 
year, were looked forward to by impartial politicians with 
well -justified alarm.' The counter-meetings were held at 
Dromore, in Tyrone, on January 1, 1884. Police and military 
held the ground to prevent hostilities ; but several attacks 
were made upon the Nationalists by the Orangemen, who had 
to be driven back by the bayonets of the police and the sabres 
of the cavalry. Li one of these encounters a young Orange- 
man named Giffen, who had been brought in — like many 



ORANGE AND GREEN 341 

others— from another district to swell the Orange levees for 
the occasion, was mortally womided and died shortly after. 
The Government then adopted the plan, whenever Orange 
and Green counter-meetings w^ere announced, of proclaiming 
both meetings ; breaches of the peace were thus prevented, 
though the Nationalist party strongly protested against a 
policy which allowed the Orangemen to silence any national 
meeting by merely announcing opposition, and thus calling 
down a Government proclamation on both alike. 

* One of tlie latest events of the year was also one of the 
most remarkable — the solemn presentation to Mr. Parnell of 
the long-collected, much-discussed testimonial. A banquet to 
Mr. Parnell was given in the Rotunda, Dublin, on Tuesday, 
December 11. The testimonial, originally intended to be 
limited to some fourteen thousand pounds, had swelled to 
some thirty-eight thousand pounds. Mr. Parnell's speech on 
this occasion came, like so many other of his utterances, upon 
the world somewhat in the nature of a surprise. It had been 
confidently expected in many quarters that the tone of Mr. 
Parnell's speech would be, if not exactly conciliatory towards 
the Government, at least uttered in no unfriendly or unsym- 
pathetic spirit. The speech, however, was given in most 
uncompromising terms. 

' Mr. Parnell began by contrasting the position of the Irish 
question at that moment with its position three years before, 
when the Land League was founded. But though much had 
been done since to further the well-being of Ireland, there 
was yet much to do. There must be no more coercion, and 
there must be no more emigration. On this latter point Mr. 
Parnell had the strong support of the majority of the Roman 
Catholic bishops in Ireland, who, in a circular issued in July, 
had declared themselves very strongly opposed to the Govern- 
ment emigration policy. Mr. Parnell sharply censured the 
conduct of Mr. Trevelyan. Between Mr. Trevelyan and Mr. 
Forster there was this great difference, that while Mr. Forster 
always tried to overwhelm his opponents by saying that his 
great ambition was to enable every one in Ireland to do what 



S42 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

they had a legal right to do, Mr. Trevelyan's great ambition 
appeared to be to prevent anybody in Ireland from doing what 
he had a legal right to do. In support of this charge, he 
adduced the case of the imprisonment of Mr. Timothy 
Harrington, of the seizure of the Kerry Sentinel and the 
imprisonment of its editor — '* as well might you flog a school- 
master because an idle schoolboy drew an idle picture on his 
slate "—for the proclamation of the Nationalist meetings in 
the North of Ireland. 

' But, in spite of the Government, the national position 
was a strong one, and its cause a winning one. Even coercion 
could not last for ever, but if it were to be renewed it should 
be by a Tory and not a Liberal Government. ''Beyond a 
shadovv^ of doubt it will be for the Irish people in England — 
separated, isolated as they are — and for your independent 
Irish members, to determine at the next General Election 
whether a Tory or a Liberal English Ministry shal rule Eng- 
land. This is a great force and a great power. This force 
has already gained for Ireland inclusion in the coming Fran- 
chise Bill. We have reason to be proud, hopeful, and energetic, 
determined that this generation shall not pass away until it 
has bequea.thed to those who come after us the great birth- 
right of national independence and prosperity." Such was 
the tenor of Mr. Parnell's utterances. 

' The emphatic vigour of this speech naturally roused the 
greatest excitement in both countries. The Free^nan' s _ Jour- 
nal, after declaring that the banquet would "live in the memory 
of all who were present, and in the records of the time, as the 
most magnificent of Irish national demonstrations," added 
that Mr. Parnell's speech " demolishes the fictions about pacts 
and treaties with the Government like so many houses of 
cards." The English papers for the most part were surprised 
by Mr. Parnell's tone. The Times declared that " no more 
uncompromising defiance was ever flung in the face of a nation 
or a Government," but consoled itself by believing that Mr. 
Parnell had " overrated his strength," while his attack upon 
the Irish Executive might " be taken as a proof that Lord 



ORANGE AND GREEN 343 

Spencer's administration in Ireland is an obstacle the Land 
League party cannot get over." 

' Perhaps the most remarkable utterance of the London 
press, however, was an article in the Fall Mall Gazette, 
entitled '' The Master of the Situation." It said, " The young 
Irish squire of English education and American descent " was 
* * in some respects the most interesting figure in the empire . . . 
One of the youngest members of the House of Commons . . . 
he is, beyond question, one of the most powerful. . . . He is 
not only the chief of a devoted party, as much the * un- 
crowned king of Ireland ' as in the days before Kilmainham, 
but he aspires, not without solid ground for his ambition, to 
play the part of a Parliamentary Warwick', and to pose as the 
master of the situation in the Imperial Parliament." " One- 
half of our recent mistakes," the Fall Mall went on to say, 
** have arisen from our not taking sufficient account of Mr. 
Parnell and the people who think with Mr. Parnell. ... It 
would be equally irrational to wax wroth at what is described 
as his ' malevolent language,' or the * brutality ' of his vitu- 
peration. We gave them the plank bed, the solitary cell, and 
prison fare. They give us in return ' vulgar obloquy and 
truculent abuse.' So far as the exchange goes we have so 
much the best of it that we need not be too squeamish about 
the quality of their compliments." The article concluded by 
saying that though " Mr. Parnell's claim to be master of the 
situation cannot be fully recognised until he gives proof that 
he can hold together a party which has never before been held 
together for any length of time," yet, ''should Mr. Parnell 
really unite Irishmen, and teach them submission and loyalty 
to their own leader, he will do more for Ireland than anything 
he has as yet even attempted." ' 



344 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

CHAPTEE XXin. 

HOME BULE. 

It is not necessary for my present purpose to give more than 
a cursory glance at the events since the Conservative accession 
in' 1885. The difficulties of the Government were growing 
greater. Mr. William O'Brien succeeded in exposing a ter- 
rible record of offence on the part of certain officials of 
Dublin Castle — a record which showed the existence of a 
horrible condition of corruption in certain phases of viceregal 
society. Mr. William O'Brien, in the face of great difficulty, 
proved his case with a result which caused a considerable 
scattering of certain Crown officials. It became daily and 
hourly more obvious that the Irish difficulty was only growing 
greater. Mr. Trevelyan, weary of a post for which he was 
quite unsuited, gave up the Irish Secretaryship for the 
Chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster, and was succeeded 
in Dublin Castle by Mr. Campbell Bannerman. Mr. Campbell 
Bannerman had not a very long term of office. 

The Government had exhausted it? mandate, and was 
near its doom. It fell, curiously enough, not upon any of the 
great questions with which it had dealt, not upon its Irish 
policy nor its policy in Egypt, but upon Mr. Childers' Budget. 
On June 8, 1885, the Government was defeated by a majority 
of twelve, and a few days later Lord Salisbury accepted 
office, and Lord Eandolph Churchill became to all intents and 
purposes the leader of the Conservative party. At first the 
attitude of the new Government was friendly towards Ireland. 
Its leaders expressed themselves severely upon Lord Spencer's 
administration. 

The new Viceroy, Lord Carnarvon, was known to have 
strong Home Rule leanings. The attitude of conciliation did 
not last very long. After a vexed existence of a few months it 
became obvious that the Conservative Government were more 
anxious to be out of office than in. It was soon apparent that, 



HOME RULE 345 

overburdened by its difficulties, the Conservative Government 
was riding for a fall. It was doomed to die like its predecessor, 
actually if not nominally upon the Irish question. It had 
dallied with that question helplessly, aimlessly, inconsistently. 
In "the person of Lord Carnarvon the Government coquetted 
with Home Rule, interviewed Irish leaders, and promised, in 
that delightfully indefinite way which is the joy of Conserva- 
tive statesmen, all sorts of speedy blessings for Ireland. The 
negotiations which Lord Carnarvon opened up with the Home 
Rule leaders are matters of history. 

It was not, indeed, in Lord Carnarvon's power to pledge 
the Government of which he was a member to any particular 
course of action ; it would hardly have been in Lord Salisbury's 
power to do so much ; but it would be idle to consider as 
serious the feeble defence raised in certain Conservative 
quarters, when the secret was no longer a secret, that Lord 
Carnarvon was simply making a stroke off his own bat oat 
of a purely personal curiosity to learn what Mr. Parnell's 
opinions upon the Irish question were. Mr. Parnell's opinions 
upon the Irish question were fairly well known, and it would 
be absurd indeed to suppose that the Lord Lieutenant of 
Ireland, in seeking out a formal interview with the leader of 
the Irish people, had attached no greater significance to the 
act than would belong to a meeting between two wholly 
obscure and uninteresting private individuals. 

However, the Conservative Government, after well-nigh 
committing itself to a policy of Home Rule through the 
speeches of its leaders and the action of its Viceroy, took fright. 
Those who were chiefly responsible for directing its action 
saw or thought they saw that Ireland was too unpopular to 
be safely patronised yet, and the Government swung round the 
political circle with amazing alacrity. 

Lord Randolph Churchill, imitating the example of Lord 
Iddesleigh, organised a crusade in the North of Ireland. 
Lord Iddesleigh was a mild man and an urbane politician, but 
he succeeded in sowing the seeds of riot and disturbance in 
the North of Ireland. If he could accomplish so much, what 



346 IBELANB SIXCE THE UNION 

might not Lord Eandolph Churchill accomplish ? He did 
accomplish much. He stirred up all the worst passions ; he 
incited to riot and civil war ; he prophesied for the Orange 
party laurel victory if they were firm in denying the law and 
authority of Parliament ; he cheered their hearts with stirring 
citations from the poet Campbell, and leaving behind him any 
number of texts on which appeals to riot and outrage might 
be based, returned home in triumph. 

Sir Michael Hicks-Beach announced the intention of the 
Government to ask for power to suppress the National League. 
This was a dramatic touch intended for the gallery, which 
Sir Michael knew well enough could come to nothing. On 
January 27 the Government were defeated by a majority of 
seventy-nine on Mr. Jesse Ceilings' amendment to the Queen's 
Speech, and Mr. Gladstone returned to power. 

It was known by this time that Mr. Gladstone's views 
upon the Irish question had been greatly extended. Mr. 
Gladstone had never been a hard-and-fast opponent of Home 
Eule, and it was obvious to those who had studied his career 
with any care for the last few years, that his mind was more 
and more inclining in favour of the extension of local govern- 
ment in Ireland, in the direction desired by the Irish people, 
as the only possible solution of the Irish difficulty. Rumours 
of all kinds had spread abroad during the duration of Lord 
Salisbury's Government as to the nature of Mr. Gladstone's 
views upon the Irish question, and as to the precise form in 
which Mr. Gladstone would, when ho had the power, shape his 
plans for the better government of Ireland. 

All doubts were soon to be set at rest. The new Glad- 
stone Government at once adopted an attitude of the strongest 
sympathy with Ireland. Loi'd Aberdeen, who was appointed 
Lord Lieutenant, was destined to be one of the very few 
Viceroys whose names are dear to the Irish people. It was 
soon known that the Government had a Home Eule Bill in 
preparation ; soon known too that the projected measure was 
the cause of many dissensions in the Cabinet, which eventuated 
in the retirement of Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Trevelyan from 



HOME RULE 347 

the Ministerial ranks. All manner of rumours as to the 
precise nature of the measure which was to mark a new era 
in Irish history were abroad ; all speculations were satisfied on 
Thursday, April 8, 1886. 

The history of modern times affords no parallel to the 
exciting scene which the House of Commons presented on 
that afternoon. There were many members whose memories 
of the struggles on that battle-ground went back to the days 
when Lord Palmerston was summarily dismissed from office 
in 1851, and to the wild excitement which followed Mr. Lowe's 
hour of more than Koman triumph, when his purple face and 
silver hairs flamed comet-like across the political horizon, and 
carried destruction to Mr. Gladstone's Government in its wake. 
There are even some who recalled the feverish passions, the 
bitter animosities, and fiery enthusiasms of the days of the 
first Keform Bill. But no man's memory could conjure from 
the past any scene of excitement comparable to that which 
St. Stephen's witnessed on that memorable Tlmrsda3^ 

When the time came for the Speaker's little procession to 
enter the Chamber, it seemed to be threading its way to the 
table with difficulty through a human sea. The House has 
been crowded before often enough during its history. Eecent 
years have more than once witnessed occasions on which it 
has been described as full to overflowing. But such fulness 
was almost emptiness as contrasted with the choking closeness 
with which it was packed on April 8, 1886. The officials of 
the House have assured curious inquirers that never before 
has there been any instance of the floor of the House being 
filled with chairs for the accommodation of its members. 
There were twenty-eight chairs on the floor on Thursday. 
Could their number have been multiplied by ten they would not 
have been equal to the demand there was for them. One of 
the most peculiar features of the event was the voluntary 
suffering which legislators inflicted upon themselves in order 
to obtain good places for the great occasion. One member 
actually got to Westminster at half-past five in the morning : 
the majority of the Irish m embers were there by six. Members 



348 IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

who arrived at eight found that they were too late to obtain a 
good seat, and by a little after nine o'clock there was not a 
place of any kind to be had. Such unwonted attendance was 
a decisive tribute to the absorbing interest of the day. 

The aspect of the Chamber when Mr. Gladstone entered 
was exceptionally curious. Almost all those on his own side, 
even rebellious Whigs and disaffected Radicals, rose to their 
feet and hailed him with applause — an example that was in- 
stantly followed by all the Irish members. By an odd chance 
the composition of the House was such that it appeared as if 
the whole House rose to greet Mr. Gladstone. The explanation 
of this curious phenomenon was in this wise. The Irish 
members present in full force had not only occupied all the 
seats below the gangway on the Opposition side of the House, 
but had flowed across the Rubicon of the gangway and occupied 
a surprisingly large propoition of the seats above it. Thus a 
large bulk of the Conservative members were driven into the 
upper galleries, into the twenty- eight seats on the floor of the 
House, and into the standing places below the Bar and behind 
the Speaker's chair. 

It was this combination of fortuitous circumstances which 
gave such an apparently comprehensive character to Mr. 
Gladstone's welcome, and which must have been not a little 
puzzling to the unsophisticated eyes of strangers in the gal- 
leries. 

The oratorial capacity of Mr. Gladstone was never more 
strikingly manifest than during the course of the three hours 
and twenty-five minutes which his speech occupied. He was 
excessively pale and his voice was very hoarse at first, but he 
soon assumed complete command over its tones, and then the 
House listened to one of the greatest speeches of our century. 
The inflections of the voice were marvellously controlled : the 
tones rose and fell, now in what seemed like almost sibyllic 
exultation, anon dying down to some pathetic whisper, low 
but perfectly audible; every gesture furthering the dramatic 
intensity of the words the speaker was using. On Mr. 
Gladstone's own following the Prime Minister played as upon 



ROME RULE 349 

some favourite instrument. Even the large proportion of the 
disaffected forgot their differences for the moment — actually 
lost their heads under the glamour of the performance— and 
cheered as lustily as the rest. Only the Conservatives sat 
stiffly and unmoved. 

Neither the history of the reign nor the history of the 
century afford any parallel to the scene of this day. The 
records of contemporary events afford many examples of 
great and stirring moments in the chronicle of the Commons 
Chamber at Westminster. The introduction of great measures 
of social political reform, the debates which have been big with 
the fates of Ministers, and which have resulted in the overthrow 
of administrations that seemed yesterday to be deeply rooted 
in popular favour, the explanations consequent upon moment- 
ous resignations, all these varied means of arousing intense 
political excitement have each in their turn thronged the 
panelled room with members and lined the walls with the 
breathless spectators of epoch-making episodes. But the 
rise of no measure and the fall of no Minister have ever 
stirred St. Stephen's to such fever-fire of excitement as that 
which animated it all through the long hours of that Thurs- 
day's life. Neither the introduction of the first Eeform Bill, 
with all the fervid emotions of the consequent debates, nor 
the excitements of such Parliamentary catastrophes as the 
dismissal of Lord Palmerston in 1851 and the defeats of Mr. 
Gladstone in 1866 and 1885, can be fairly said to offer even a 
distant parallel to the passions, the enthusiasm, the fear and 
hope and fury and exultation which swept the surface and 
stirred the depths of the greatest legislative assemblage of 
modern times. 

Most of those present had taken part in all the thrilling 
incidents that have marked the stormy course of Parlia- 
mentary history for the past six years. The House of 
Commons has outwatched the stars while the battle for Irish 
rights has raged below ; night has faded into dawn and dawn 
become noon, and the day's strength waned into evening, and 
through night to dawn again, while some fierce Parliamentary 



850 IRELAND SINGE THE UNION 

struggle has been foagiit out. The representatives of the Irish 
nation have been again and again expelled from the Chamber 
amidst wild scenes of passion and tumult. Few who shared 
in those tumultuous emotions will forget the two fateful hours 
in which successive Ministries fell on the cause of coercion 
before the votes of an united Irish party. All these scenes 
and incidents are graven upon men's memory, but no one of 
them, not the fiercest and stormiest, could for a moment 
compare with the keen, almost agonising, excitement and the 
vast historical dignity of the scene which the House of 
Commons presented at four o'clock on the afternoon of 
Thursday, the ever-memorable 8th of April. 

One great fact rises distinctly, star-like, out of all the 
confusion and passion and heart-burning and heart-uplifting 
of that memorable day — the fact that a great English Minister, 
the foremost and most famous statesman of his age, has 
recognised, speaking to an attentive Senate, to an attentive 
nation, to an attentive world, the right of the Irish people 
to self-government. That great historic fact is at once the 
triumph and the justification of an oppressed but an uncon- 
quered nationality. 

Whatever may be thought of the particular measure which 
Mr. Gladstone has introduced, whatever may be its ultimate 
fate in the House of Commons or in the House of Peers, 
whatever modifications, improvements, extensions, it may be 
found capable of sustaining are all but details, vastly important 
in themselves, but for the moment unimportant in contrast 
with the stupendous, the monumental importance of the recog- 
nition by the foremost of English statesmen of that right of 
Ireland to make her own laws for her own people, which for 
so many centuries has been so persistently, so bloodily, denied 
to her. There are certain hours in the lives of great men 
which are in themselves epochs, hours when a single speech 
is more momentous, more far reaching, than half a dozen 
revolutions. Such was the hour which but a year ago re- 
versed the verdict of seven centuries ; such was the speech 
in which Mr. Gladstone apologised for the folly of eighty-six 



H03IE RULE 351 

years of false and fatal union, and frankly recognised, late in 
the day, indeed, but not too late, that Ireland contained a 
people ' rightly struggling to be free.' 

The great Prime Minister had the advantage of addressing 
the greatest speech of his life to the largest audience that was 
ever gathered together within the precincts of the popular 
assembly. An observer in one of the choking spaces set apart 
for strangers, looking down upon those packed benches, upon 
that floor where, for the first time within memory of man, seats 
had been placed for members upon the blocked gangways, 
upon the thickly-clustering groups behind the Speaker's chair 
and below the bar, upon the overflowing passages and groaning 
galleries, might well have imagined that so full a House could 
scarcely be made fuller even by the addition of a solitary indi- 
vidual. In sober fact, it would have been hard indeed to find 
room for another human being in the dense assemblage, or for 
the over-taxed and enervating atmosphere to afford him a life- 
sustaining supply of oxygen, if room had been found for the 
sole of his foot. 

But crowded though the Chamber was, and crowded, too, 
with perhaps the most remarkable throng of men that has 
ever been gathered together within the walls of Westminster, 
it was for some of those present more closely crowded and 
with a yet more eminent congregation. The mind's eye of 
many an Irish member, gifted for the moment by fancy with 
the powers of second sight, peopled it with further presences. 
As the gaze wandered over that vast sea of human faces they 
seemed to change to faces scarcely less familiar, though they 
have long been strange to sunlight and starlight, and in a 
moment a new and more Imperial Parliament, a Parliament 
not of the quick but of the dead, was summoned, and this 
new ' call of the House ' evoked from the long avenues of the 
past a world of stately shadows. The Irish benches, crowded 
with enthusiastic colleagues rallying in exultation around the 
chosen leader of their country and their cause, seemed to give 
place to a legion of mighty and mournful phantoms. 

The white-haired, blind old man, whose stalwart frame 



36^ IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 

was bowed by sorrow and whose sightless gaze had in it such 
a wistful pathos, was not he the exiled Earl whose grave in 
Roman earth is now the shrine of so many pilgrimages ? Near 
him, his soldier's face writhed with pain or poison, came the 
great kinsman of his House, Owen Eoe. Sarsfield, with the 
blood of Landen on his breast and hand ; Talbot of Tirconnell's 
weary, haughty face ; Eoger Moore, handsome, chivalrous, 
devoted ; William Molyneux, with the ' Case of Ireland ' in 
his grasp ; the small fervid figure of the Dean of St. Patrick's, 
with ' fierce indignation ' blazing in his wild dark eyes ; Lucas, 
with his volume clasped in his embrace ; the gallant bearing 
of Charlemont ; Grattan, in the uniform of the Volunteers ; 
Flood, restless and repentant ; Curran, swaying with stormy 
eloquence — these and many others floated by in proud suc- 
cession. 

With them were yet livelier and loftier presences. Edward 
Fitzgerald, his comely body gashed with more scars than 
CaBsar's, and by baser hands ; Tone, with that grim wound in 
his throat ; Bagenal Harvey and Father John ; the Brothers 
Sheares, in death as in life undivided ; and Emmet, with the 
livid circle round his young neck. On they came, the long 
line of martyrs who had died to defeat the fatal principle 
which the Act of Union formulated, and who seemed now to 
rise from their graves at the sound of the knell of that 
principle. 

Nor were the phantoms of such fancy confined alone to 
one side of the House, nor to the Irish benches. Across the 
floor, even on the seat where the Ministers of the hour were 
grouped together, the eye of fancy seemed to discern the 
benign shadows of the illustrious dead. Chesterfield and 
Fitzwiliiam stood there side by side. The genius of Charles 
James Fox seemed to hover like an inspiring influence about 
the bowed form of the Prime Minister, and the likeness of 
Burke leaned over to prompt his brilliant biographer and 
follower with his silver voice, and to encourage him with his 
golden counsel. A few more ominous and forbidding shapes 
were huddled together in angry companionship upon the 



HOME RULE 353 

Opposition side of the House, lurking furtively in the dark 
spaces behind the Speaker's chair. Cornwallis and Castle- 
reagh and Pitt, Stafford and Essex, and Perrot, and Bagnal, 
Cromwell and William of Nassau, with such baser spectres as 
Sirr, and Swan, and Higgins, emerged momentarily from the 
darkness and vanished again with the fitful confusion of a 
dream. 

All this ghostly army, multiplying in bewildering rapidity, 
swayed and floated silently forward, their pale faces shining 
with wild emotions of hope and exultation and hate. Then a 
great cry rose up, a fierce, tumultuous yell of triumph and 
salutation ; the grey ghosts seemed to shudder at the sound, 
and swiftly vanished as the clamour rose to their place of 
shades. St. Stephen's was itself again, and the assembled, 
living, breathing multitude were — the mnjority of them — 
cheering themselves hoarse in welcome of Mr. Gladstone, who 
had just risen to his feet. Irishmen who listened to the 
orator, and heard the impassioned words in which an English 
Minister, for the first time in the face of all the world, re- 
cognised the rights of the Irish people, felt that indeed the 
mighty dead might well be content with tliat day's business, 
and might, indeed, if it were permitted to them, quit their 
resting-places to share in the triumph of a day which marks 
an epoch m Irish history — an epoch which seems as if it were 
destined to end the old evil order of repression and revolution, 
and open the new order of freedom and of hope. 

At this point my record pauses. Everyone knows the 
fortunes of the pf.rticular measure which Mr. Gladstone in- 
troduced ; everyone might, I should imagine, be able to predict 
the inevitable results of the introduction of that measure. 
The Irish question has passed since the 8th of last April 
into a wholly new phase. The struggles not merely of five 
years but of eighty-five years, not merely since the Union but 
for many centuries, are practically at an end. Those were 
the struggles of the Irish people, alone, unaided, to plead 
their cause and to obtain justice. With the recognition by a 
great English Prime Minister of the justice of Ireland's 

A A 



354 IRELAND SINCE TIIR UNION 

appeal and the righteousness of her cause, the whole aspect of 
the longest political struggle in history changes. A vast pro- 
portion of the English people are henceforward in sympathy 
with the Irish people ; all those who are most closely identified 
with the cause of progress, the love of liberty, and the inte- 
rests of civilisation are eager to allow to Ireland the right to 
manage Irish affairs according to Irish ideas. This is a great 
triumph for Ireland and England alike. England no less 
than Ireland should be eternally grateful to the great states- 
man who has undone so much evil, who has healed so great a 
hurt, who has atoned for so much injustice, who has united 
two hostile nationalities, and has, while freeing Ireland from 
her unhappy servitude, strengthened the empire which it is 
his duty to serve. 



INDEX. 



ABE 

Abercrombie, Sir Ralph, sent over to 

take conimnnd of the troops in 

Irehind, 49 
Aberdeen, Lord, his viceroyalty of 

Ireland, 20,21; one of the few 

Viceroys dear to the Irish people, 

84(5 
Addison, Joseph, 264 
* All the Talents,' ministry of, 83 ; 

their resijjjnation, 84 
Althorpe, Lord, carries a vote for 

public works in Ireland, 171 ; on 

the Arms Bill, ib. 
American Civil War, 181-182 
Amurath succeeding Amurath, 83 
Anne, Queen, statesmen of, 9, 15 
Aristophanes, 111 
Arminius, 6 
Armstroni^, Captain, 50 
Ath 01. e, capture of, 1 
Aughriin, rout of, I 
Austerlitz, battle of, 82, 83 



Back Lane Pai lianient, concessions 
to, made witli one hand and 
taken awav wiih the other, 42, 
43 

♦ Baratarlcum,' 25, 2fi, 29 

B iretii, JdSv'pli, 31 

Barriimtim, Sir Jonah, his eloquent 
de-cripti( n < f he last scene in the 
Irish House of Commons, 64 

Barron, Sir H. VV., mutiou of, 173 

Bastille, fall of the, 40 

Beacon field, Lord, on Shell, 99 ; his 
letter to the l>uke of Marlborough, 
228-2o0 ; appeal to the country 
on the Irish question, "228-231 ; 
his keen political foresight, 230 ; 
his brilliant and bitter speech 
against Mr. Gladstone's Govern- 
ment, 255, 256 



BEE 

Beauclerk, Topham, 3l 

Bedford, Duke of, succeeds Lord Har- 
wicke in the Lieutenantship, 83 ; 
earns a dishonourable immor- 
tality, ib. 

Beresford, Lady Frances Maria, mar- 
ried to Henry Flood, 23 

Berwick, Duke of, 4 

Besshorough Commission, t'l ', 277 

Biggar, Mr., his loyalty .'<nd devotion 
to Mr. Parneil, 227 ; the ideal 
lieutenant of the leader of a small 
minority, ib. ; a successful trader, 
235 ; suspended, 260, 264 ; wordy 
wrangle between him and Mr. 
Milbank, 2')6 ; prosecution of, for 
a violent attack upon Lord 
Spencer, 311 

Bodenstown churchyard, 55 

Bolingbroke, 32 

Bond, Oliver, 43, 46 ; seizure of, 49, 
50 ; death in Newgate, 51, 58 

Boswell's Life of Johnson, 31 

Boulter, Primafe, 24 

Bowe-!, Lord Chance lor, 10 

Bowes Csniith), a Hercules in a 
leather apron, 137 

Boycott, Captain, treatment of, by 
Lord Earne's tenantry, 250 ; as- 
sisted bv the Orangemen of the 
North, 251 

' Boycotting,' its principle not aggres- 
sive, 251, 27o 

Boyle, Dr., on the eviction of Irish 
peasants, 171 

Boyne Water, tii^h' by, 1 

Boynton, ' the ianLniishing,' married 
to the Duke of Tirconnel, 2 

Bradlaugh, Ch.ir!es, 260 

Brei^an, Joseph (Joe Brenan), 13 t ; a 

man of many and varied gifts, 

135 ; loved by ' Mary of the 

Nation,'' ib. ; at Mrs. Heron's 

A A2 



356 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



BEE 

supper-rooms, 135, 136, 138 ; his 
insurrection, 139; escapes to Ame- 
rica, 140 ; marries, but not ' Mary 
of the Nation,^ ib. ; his blindness 
and death, ib. 

liret Harre, his ' argonauts,' 178 

Brett, Serj^eant, accidentally killed by 
the rescuers of Kellv and Deasy, 
191-192 

Brian Boroimhe, 125-126 

Bright, John, 144 ; his power and 
following greatly increased, 156 ; 
regarded as the champion of ad- 
vanced thought and the apostle 
of the new ideas, ib. ; liis speeches 
on Irisli questions, 157-164 ; sur- 
prising change of front in his 
later utteranci s, 157, 158, 163, 
164, 167, 168 ; his conduct towards 
the Land League and Home 
Rulers, 158, 159, 161, 168, 164, 
167, 168 ; his tribute to Mr. John 
Dillon, 165, 246 ; his efforts on 
behalf of the men of M:inchester, 
193 ; criticism of Mr. Gladstone's 
list of measure?, 202 ; his speech 
in support of Mr. Forster's Coer- 
cion Bill, 261-263 

Brillat Savarin, 147 

Brophy, Hugh, 188 

Browning, Robert, quoted, 136 

Brownlow, Mr., his Bill for reclama- 
tion of waste lands in Ireland, 170 ; 
a futile attempt at remedial legis- 
lation, ib. 

Buckingham, Duke of, 2 

Bunting, Mr., his collection of the 
national music of Ireland, 67 

Burgh, Hussey, 28, 33 ; fine simile of, 
30, 62 

Buried cities, 17 

Burke. Kdmund, genius of, 10 ; on 
the Penal Code, 14 ; the greatest 
of Irishmen, 18 ; his famous letter, 
25 ; on Sir Hercules Langrishe, 
28, 31 ; his reply to the Duke of 
Bedford, 83 ; richl^'-coloured 
periods of, 127 ; his silver voice 
and golden counsel, 352 

Burke, Mr. T. H., assassination of, in 
Phoenix Park, 301-303, 817-319, 
321 

Butler, Simon, 43 

Butt, Mr. Isaac, 145 ; character and 
career of, 218; unwisely neg- 
lected by the Conservative 



CAT 

leaders, 214 ; chosen leader of the 
Home-Rule movement, 215, 217 ; 
did not make much use of his 
opportunities, 220 ; his p'acid 
leadership, 221 ; severs himself 
from the unpopular action of liis 
fellow-members, 226 ; death of. 
227, 235 

Byrne, Miles, 48 ; a ready and daring 
colleague of Emmet, 70, 120 

Byron, Lord, captivated by the story 
of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, 45 



California, 178 

Campbell Hannerman,, Mr. succeeds 
Mr. Trevelyan in the Irish Secre- 
taryship, 344 

Campbell, Thomas, Lord Randolph 
Churchill's stirring quotations 
from, 346 

Canada, England threatened with loss 
of, 121 ; Fenian attempts on, 182- 
183, 190 

Canning, George, 99 

Capel, Lord, Viceroy of Ireland, 8 ; 
Parliament of, 8, 9 

Captain Moonlight, 290 ; identilied 
with a man named Connell, and 
arrested, ib. ; turns informer, ib. 

Carew, Shapland, his reply to Castle- 
reagh's offer of a bribe, 59 

Carey, James, arrest of, 315 ; turns 
informer, 318, 319 ; reveals the 
details of the Phoenix Park assas- 
sination, 319; his evidence, 319- 
320 ; his dramatically tragic fate, 
322, 323 

Carlyle, Thomas, his ' French Revo- 
lution' quoted, 293 

Carnarvon, Lord, his South African 
Confederation Bill, 225 ; becomes 
Viceroy of Ireland, 344 ; known 
to have a strong Home- Rule-lean- 
ing, ib. ; opens up negotiations 
with the Home-Rule leaders, 345 

Cartouche, 189 

Casanova, his escape from durance, 189 

Cashel, rock of, its similarity to the 
Athenian Acropolis, 274 

Castlereigh, 59, 64 ; death of, 69; his 
unpopularity, 254 

Castor and Pollux, 324 

Catholic disabilities, 6-13, 39 

Catholic Emancipation, 68, 69, 75, 92, 
94, 95 ; becomes law, 100 



INDEX. 



357 



CAT 

Catholic University in Ireland, pro- 
posed charter for, 205, 207 

Catiline ci nsuring Cet hegus for trea 
SO!., 285 

Caullie'd, James, Earl of Charlemont, 
28, 30, 31, 40 ; gal'ant bearing of, 
852 

Cavendish, Lord Frederick, succeeds 
Mr. Forster as Irish Secretary, 
300 ; arrival in Dublin, 301 ; 
assassination of, in Plicenix Park, 
301-303, 317-318, 321-322 

Cellini, Benvenuto, his escape from 
durance, 189 

Cethegus and Catiline, 285 

Chalmers, Dr., 99 

Chamberlain, Mr , 230; his retirement 
from Mr. (lladstone's Cabinet, 
346 

Chanson de Roland, translation of, 57 

Cliarlemont, Lord. See Caultield, 
James 

Charles I. and the Five Members, 
266 

Charles II., Court of, 2 ; reign of, 5, 7 

Chartist movement in England, 112 

Chatham, genius of, 27 

Chatterton, at eighteen, 135 

Chester Castle, capture of, planned by 
the Fenians, 190 

Chesterfield, Lord, on landlords and 
Whiteboys, 15 ; his beneficent 
viceroj^alty of Ireland, 20 ; his 
verses on Molly Lepell, 32; 
vision of, 352 

Churchill, Lord Randolph, leader of 
the Conservative party in the 
House of Commons, 314; his 
crusade in the north of Ireland, 
345 

Cicero, 56, 99, 127 

Clanricarde, Lord, his daughter mar- 
ried to Patrick Sarsfieid, Earl of 
Lucan, and afterwards to the 
Duke of Berwick, 6 

Clare election, the, 94-97 

Clare, Lord, the basest of Pitt's tools 
against the Irish, 49, 59 ; death 
of, 69 

Clontarf meeting, dispersal of, 115, 
116 

Cobden, Richard, death of, 156, 261 

Coercion Bill, Mr. Forster's, 254, 255, 
258-272 ; passed, 273 

Cork Examiner, the most important 
paper in tb-2 south of Ireland, 198 



DAV 

Cornwallis, 58, 59 

* Corrig-an-Aifrion,' or the Mass-stone, 
13 

Corry, a tool of the Castle, 62 ; his 
clumsy falsehoods, 63 ; his duel 
with Gra' tan, 64 

Corydon, the informer, 190 

Courtney, Mr. Leonard, 224, 225 ; his 
appointment as Under Secretary 
for the Home Dep;irtment, 255 

Cowen, Mr. Joseph, his strenuous at- 
tack at "Newcastle on the (lovern- 
ment policy of coercion, 281 , 282, 
287 

Cowper, Lord, Viceroy of Ireland, 
254 ; his resignation, 299 , 300 

Crawford, Mr. Sharman, his Bill to 
amend the law relating to land- 
lord and tenant, 172 ; his leuant- 
Right Bill, 172-173 ; his liill to 
regulate the Ulster custom, 173 

Crimean War, outbreak of, 151 ; end 
of, 152 

Croke, Archbishop of Cashel, his ap- 
proval of the Ladies' Land 
League, 274, 275 ; condemns the 
No-rent Manifesto, 288; on the 
invention andoxagL.eration otout- 
rages, 291 ; induces Mr. Dillon to 
withdraw his intended resigna- 
tion, 309 

Cromwollian massacres in Drogheda, 
2 ; atrocities, 47 

Cromwell's Ironsides, 2 

Curran, John Philpot, his heroic and 
desperate sino;le handed fight for 
the men of Ninety-eight, 54 ; his 
efforts for Wolfe Tone, 55 ; his 
poem of ' The Deserter,' 56 ; care?r 
of, ib,, 72 ; opposed to Emmt^t's 
love for his daughter, 73, 74 ; 
apparition of, 352 

Curran, Richard, son of John Philpot 
Curran, 73 

Curran, Sarah, daughter of John 
Philpot Curran, 6 ; the idol of 
Emmet's heart, 72-73 ; marries 
another, 74 



Danton, words of, 87 

Daunt, Mr. O'Neill, his story of the 
Catholic and Protestant school- 
fellows, 13 

Davis, Thomas, his lyric on the grave 
of Wolfe Tone, 55 ; one of the 



358 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



DAY 

« 

founders of the Nation newspaper, 
118; the most genuine Irish 
poet since Moore, 128 ; death of, 
129 ; soft-spo:;en lyric of, 337 

Davitt, Michael, 228 ; his uncom- 
promising oppo if ion to all in- 
timidation, 251, 257 ; arrest of, 
2G7, 268 ; elec'eil member of 
Parliament for M.'.-uh, 294 ; not 
allowed to take hi-i -eat, ib. ; 
rumoured release of, 299 ; advo- 
cates the nntionalisation ol the 
land, 309 ; a large part of his life 
passed in pri'jon, 312 ; imprison- 
ment, ih. ; relense, ih. ; content 
to act loyally witli Mr, Parnell, 
313 ; letter in the Kerry Sentinel, 
331 ; released from prison, ih. 

Dawson, Mr. Charles, M.P., a strong 
Nationalist, elected Lord Maj'or 
of Dublin, 289, 292, 304 ; pro- 
clama*ions of, 306, 307 

Deasy, Captain, a prominent Fenian, 
arrested, 191 

Derby, Lord, Hi 

Desmoulins, Camille, 111 

Devon Commission, 172, 173 

Dickens, Charles, deeply affected by a 
speech of O'Connell, 92, 102 

Dilke, Sir Charles, proclaims himself a 
Kepubli<'an,222, 2 A ; in the South 
African d<-bate, 224, 225 

Dillon, John Blake, one of the founders 
of the iV-aitoMnewspaper, 118 ; his 
personal appearance, 119; de- 
clines to censure the Phoenix 
Society, 155 ; in Parliament, 157; 
a great admirer of nnd im]ilicit 
believer in John Bright, 157-158, 
164, 167 ; sudden death of, 165 ; 
Mr. Bright's tribute to, 165-167, 
246 ; his belief in the sympathies 
of English statesmen, 327 

Dillon, John (son of the above), 
his siugnlarly impressive appear- 
ance, 119 ; paternal inheritance, 
235 ; his Kildare speech, 245, 246 '; 
his reply to Mr. Forster's attack, 
246, 247; suspended. 268, 269; 
his series of speeches in Ireland 
supporting the Land League, 
275 ; arrested and imprisoned, 
ib.; repudiates Mr. Gladstone's 
misstatements, and his compli- 
ments founded thereon, 286 ; ar- 
reslei and imprisoned, ib. ; in 



EMM 

Kilmainham, 288, 290, 292, 294; 
release, 299 ; freedom of the 
city of Dublin conferred upon 
him, 305 ; induced to withdi-aw 
or postpone his intended resig- 
nati m, 309 ; resignation of his 
seat in Parliament, 326 ; his pic- 
turesque personal appearance, 326, 
827 ; goes away to Italy and Colo- 
rado, 327 

Dioscuii, the, 325 

Disraeli, Mr., his keen political in- 
sight, 156 . appeals to the country 
on the Irish Church qnesrion, 
199 ; speech on Mr. Gladstone's 
Irish Universitv Education Bill, 
209, 210. See also Beaconsfidd, 
Lord. 

Doheny, Michael John, the corn- 
pan on in misfortu e of James 
Stephen'^, 149 ; dosi^rii.tion of, m the 
Hue and Cry, ib ; his fascin;;tuig 
story of the ' Pel 'u's Track,' ib ; 
goes to the United Irtates, 151 

Popping, Bishop of Meath, his procla- 
mation from the puljiit, 10 

* Drapier's Letters,' the, 20 

Droghi da, Cromwellian massacres in, 
2 ; siege of, 4 

Duflfv, Edward, the life and soul of the 
Fenian movement west of the 
Shannon, 188 

Duffv, Sir Charles Gavan, on Irish po- 
verty, 110, 111 ; oneof the found- 
ers of the Nation newspaper, 118 ; 
bis description of I homas Davis, 
ib. ; and of the e'der Dillon, 119 ; 
on John Pigot, 123 ; finds fame 
and fortune in Victoria, 133 ; a 
conspicuous champion of tenant- 
right, 144 ; account of M'Manu.s' 
escape from his Australasian 
prison, 171 ; 285 

Dugald Dalgetty, 32 

Dungannon, Convention at, 33 

Dynamite explosions, 328-330 



Emmet, Robert, his affianced bride, 
46 ; at Dublin University, 66 ; 
his friendship with Thomas Moore, 
67 ; his insurrection and its pur- 
pose, 70, 71 ; flight of, 72 ; his 
love for Sarah Curran, 72, 73 ; 
execution of, 73 ; his letter to 
Richard Curran, 73, 74 ; his dying 



INDEX. 



359 



EMM 

request, 74 ; his daring attempt 
and its failure, 75, 81, 88 ; tra- 
ditions of, 129 ; scene of his exe- 
cution, 179 ; apparition of, 352 

Emmet, Thomas Addis, 46 ; banished, 
61, 68 

Eviction in full swing, 141 



Feni, semi-mythic chivalry of the, 177 
Fenian Brotherhood, the, origin of the 

title, 177, 178 
Feniatiisni, rise of, 165 
Finigan, Mr., nie.nber for Ennis, sus- 
pended, 270 
Fionn, the >on of Coul, 177 
Fitzgerald, Lady Edward, 6, 45, 46 
Fitzgerald, Lord Edward, 44 ; the 
ideal hero of romance, 45 ; his 
wife, 46, 46 ; death of, 60, 68 ; his 
grave, 73, 127, 179 ; house where 
he met his deatli, 179 ; appari- 
tion of. 362 
Fitzgerald, Mr. Vesey, member for 
Countv Chire, bis seat contested 
bv O'Connell, 95 
Fitzgibbon, Black Jack, 49, 69, 69 
Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond, 258 
Fitzwilbam, Lord, his beneficent 

viceroyalty of Ireland, 20, 352 
Flood, Henry, 21-25 ; accepts office, 
28 ; his (luarrel with Grattan,28, 
29, 34, 35 ; retires from the Irish 
and finds a seat in the English 
Parliament, 36 ; death of, 37 ; 
his far-seeing statesmanship, 62 ; 
apparition ot, 352 
Foley, Mr., his designs for O'Connell's 

statue, 304 
Forster, Mr. W. E., 202 ; his appoint- 
ment to the Irish Secretaryship, 
236, 238, 239, 244, 245*; his 
attack on Mr. Dillon, 245-247 ; 
receives the nickname of ' Buck- 
shot,' 247 ; daily more unpopular, 
254 ; his proposed revival of 
Coercion, 254-257 ; introduces 
his first Coercion mea^ure, 258- 
260 ; sits doubled \\\\ 265 ; 
moves third reading of Hill, 273 ; 
his incurable cecit}' to the signs 
of the times, 289 ; more unpopu- 
lar than ever, 293 ; his journey 
of inspection into County Clare, 
ih. ; abusive epithets levelled at 
him by transatlantic journalists, 



GDA 

297 ; resignation of Irish Chief 
Secretaryship, 299, 300 ; series of 
attempts to assassinate, 317 ; and 
their failure, 317, 319; his ad- 
ministration, however well-in- 
tended, unsuccessful, 322 ; his 
fondness for the Kilmainham- 
treaty topic, 325 ; his attack on 
Mr. Parnell, ib. ; bis defence of 
Mazzini, 325-326 ; his plea in 
answer to opp< nents, 341 

Fottrell, Mr. (Jeorge, Secretary to the 
Irish Land Commission, remark- 
able par'phlet of, published under 
the semblance of official authority, 
296 ; resignation of his secretary- 
ship, 297 

Fox, Charles James, 38 ; yenius of, 
82 ; commanding influence of, 
83 ; death and burial in West- 
minster Abbev, 83, 84 ; genius of, 
362 

Freemin's Journal, the, 21, 235, 296 

French Revolution, the, 40, 46, 86, 87, 
293 

Froude, James Anthony, the most 
famous and the most unfair of 
anti-Irish historians, 52, 53 

F's, the three, 276, 2'8 



Galland, his'Mille et Une Nuits,' 
31 

Gavelkind, law of, enforced on estates 
of Irish Catholics not having 
Protestant heirs, 1 1 

General Klection of 1865, 156 

Genlis, Madame de, statements of, 45 

George I., 10, 15 

George II., his Iri-h Parliament, 25 

George 111., 10, 29, 52; stubborn 
folly of, t;9, 75, 76. 84 

George IV., the basest of the Georges, 
90 

George, Mr. Henry, arrested by mis- 
take, 308 

Geraldine, house of, 44, 45, 60, 127 

Gibbon, Edward, irritating effect 
upon him of Pitt's unalterable 
composure, 81 

Gibson, Mr., 324, 325 

Gladstone, VViiliam Ewart, on the 
state of Ireland under Grattan's 
Parliament, i'7-19, 38 ; on VVulfe 
Tone, 42 ; on the oratory of 
Richard Lalor Sheil, 99; be -omes 



360 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



GLA 

a f-upporf^er of advanced Radical 
ideas, 166 ; his process of conver- 
sion, ib. ; his Land Act of LS? 0, 
175 ; the most advanced thinker 
and keen-sighted statesman in tlie 
House of Commons, 194 ; resolu- 
tions regarding the Established 
Church in ireland, 199 ; in a 
moo 1 for great legislation, 202, 
203; his Irish Universitv Edu- 
cation Bill, 204-207, 208-211 ; 
dislike and dread of, among Irish 
Protestants, 212,223; acccjit.-ince 
of office in 1880, 239; his Mid- 
lothian speeches and Lord 
lieaconsfield, 255 ; defends the 
policy of the Government, 2i:6; 
on the Irish question, 25K-2r)7 ; 
moves to declare urgency for the 
Coercive Bills, 260 ; justifies the 
introduction of (yoerci'U and 
den<iunces Mr. Prirnell and 
Mr. Biggar, 263, 264; liis pas- 
sionate oratory, 264, 268-272 ; 
accident to, 272 ; his 1881 
Budget, 276 ; introdnccs the 
New Land Bill, ib. ; his Leeds 
campaign against the Iri h Par- 
liamentary party, 281-285 ; his 
speech at Guildhall, 287, and 
announcement of Mr. Parnell's 
arrest, ib. ; correspondence with 
Mr. Smythe of Westme^th, 295 ; 
conspicuous for his readiness to 
admit an error, 299 ; his return 
to power, 346 ; his views on the 
Irish question greatly widened, 
ih. ; impressive scene in the 
House of Commons on the in- 
troduction of his measure for 
Home Rule in Ireland, 347-354 ; 
his oratorical capacity never 
more strikii^gly .manifest, 348 ; 
the greatest speech of his life, 
351 

(ilad stone, Mr. Herbert, speech at 
Leeds, 325 

Goderich administration, temporary 
and trumper}', 95 

Goldsmith, Oliver, 22, 31 

Gordon, General, in Ireland, 252 ; 
proposal of, 253 

Gor>t, Mr., 324 

Grammont, his ' Memoirs,' 2 

Graft an's fnther, a fierce-tempered, 
narrow-minded man, 26 



HAE 

Grattan, Henry, 18 ; his speech on the 
triumph of Irish independence, 
20, 21 ; tlie greatest Irish states- 
nian of his age, 25-29 ; be- 
comes leader of the Patriot party, 
28 : his quarrel wi h E'cod, 28- 
29, 33-37 ; his great objects, 40 ; 
eli'orts for the removal of Catholic 
disabilities, 44 ; comes to the 
front again, 61-65 ; his speech in 
r( ply '■ Corry, (j3 ; his duel with 
Cony in Phoenix Park, 64, 65- 
66 ; his fir' t appearance in the 
English Mouse of Commons, 82 ; 
commands of, 101 ; apparition 
of, o52 

Grattan, Mr. Henrv, son of the above, 
170 

Grattan's Parliament, 17-19, <66 

Gray, Mr. E. D. (Home Ruler), pro- 
prietor of the Freemaris Jour- 
nal., 235 ; committed by Justice 
Lawson for contempt of court, 
305 ; released after two months' 
imprisonment, 306 

Gray, Phil, a serviceable messenger, 138 

Gray, Sir John, proprietor of the 
Freeman s Journal, 144 

Gr<elev, Horace, 121 

Greer, Mr., 144 

Grenville, Lord, 82, S3 

Griffin, Gerald, his novel of 'The 
Collegians ' quoted, 142 

Griffiths' ( Sir Richard) valuation, 171, 
218-249 



Hafiz, 124 

Hamilton, 2 

Harcourt, Lord, 28 

Harcourt, Sir William, 267, 268 ; in- 
troduces the Arms Bill iu the 
Commons, 273 ; his Bill for 
amending the law relating to ex- 
plosives, 328 

Hardwicke, Lord, Lord-Lieutennnt- 
e-hip of, 80 ; frees Ireland from 
his obnoxious presence, 83 

Hardy, Mr. Francis, on Lord Charle- 
mont, 31 

Harmau, Colonel King, regards a seat 
for Sligo as his personal property, 
234 

Harrington, Mr. Edward, editor of 
the Kerry Sentinel, imprison- 
ment of, 331, 342 



INDEX. 



361 



HAR 

Harriniiton, Mr. Timothy, proprietor 
of the_ A'erry Sentinel, imprison- 
ment of, 830, 342 ; rewarded by 
beinir elected to reprc'^ent VVcst- 
mcath in -Piirliament, SoO 

Hartin;j;ton, Lord, attacks the ob- 
structive policy of the Irish 
members, 258 ; liis griml}'- erect 
attitude, 266, 272 

Harvey, Baicenal, 51, 58, 352 

Healy, Mr. (H.)uie Kuler), career of, 
234, 265 ; suspended, 273 ; his 
amendments to Mr. Gladstone's 
new Land Bill, 279; warrant for 
his arrest, 286 ; imprisonment 
of, and its result, 311-313; 
elected memljer for Mona^han 
Count}', one of the strongholds of 
Ulster, 331, 332 ; his mastery 
and consummate knowledge of 
the Land Act, 332 

Hearts of Steel, 15 

' Hedge-schools,' 13 

Heliogabalus, court of, 32 

Hennessy, Sir John Pope (Governor 
of the Mauritius ), distinguished in 
parliamentary life for the skill and 
ability of his obstructive tactics, 
223 

Henry VIIL, King, 45; act of, 
109 

Herbert, Mr. Auberon, proclaims 
himself a Republican, 222, 264 

Heron, MiS., her earing-house at 
Cork, 135-136, 138 

Hervey, Frederick, Earl of Bristol, 
and Bishop of Derry, 31, 32 ; his 
later career and (ieath, 37 

Hervey, Lord, his Memoirs of the 
Reign of (jcor.^Lie IL, 31 ; the 
' Sp'>rus ' of Pope, 32 

Hicks-Beach, Sir Michael, his j proposal 
to suppress ihe Irish National 
League, 346 

Higgins, Francis, editor of the Free- 
mans Journal, a traitor, 50 

Hill, Sir George, recognises and 
betrays Wolfe Tone, 54 

Hoche, General, 47 

Holfmann, weird stories of, 124 

' Home Rule,' becomes the shibboleth 
of the new Irish party, 243 

Home Rule Bill, ]\Ir. 'Gladstone's, 
346-354 

Home-Rule movement, 2 '5, sqq.', 
platl'urm of, 215-210; demand 



JOY 

of the partv not a very appall in ;• 

one, 217, 345 
Horsman, Mr., 173 
Huddys, the. Lord Ardilaun's bai'i!!' , 

murder of, 291, 306 
Hugo, Victor, on Ireland, 273; visited 

by Mr. Parnell, ib. 
Humbert, General, 51 
Hume, Mr., denounces the Ministry 

for their coercive policy towards 

Ireland, 171 
Hurlingham, pi^'eon-shooting at, 252 
Hutchinson, Helv, 16 
Huy, 6 



Iddeslp:igh, Lord, 845. See also 

Northcote, Sir StatFord 
Inchiquin, Lord, brother of Mr. 

Smith O'Biieri, 125, 153 
Irish baliail lifeauire, 2, 5 
Irish Church discs ablished, 202 
Irish legend, 17 
Irisli National Land League formed, 

228 ; declared an illegjil body, 288 
Irish Xationa' League established, 

308 ; its programme and objects, 

ib. 
Irish Peoph newspaper, established 

by Stephens, 1^5 ; police descent 

on its offices, 18) 
Irish Republican Brv)therhood(LR.B.), 

177 
Ii'ish Wnr'd, ' he ( Xew York journal), 

297-298 ; 309 
Ivanhoe, 260 



Jackson, Mr., an English clergyman, 
fate of. 43 

James I., King, his creation of Irish 
boroughs, 16 

James 1 1., King, 1 

Jason, legend of. 30, 62 

Jenkins, Mr. EdwMrd, his political 
tergiversation, 224, 225 

Johnson, Dr., 23, 31 

Johnson, Mr. William M., Solicitor- 
General for Ireland, returned for 
Mallow, 314 

Jones, Paul, 29, 86 

Joyce country, the, 291, 306 

Joynes, Mr., assistant-master at Eton, 
arrested by mistake, 308 ; pub- 
lishes a litt'e book upon the Iri.sh 
question, and resigns his post, ib. 



862 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



KAV 

Kaa'ANAGh, Michael, car-driver, his 
evidence of the Phoenix Park 
murders, 318 

Ke.-'ts, John, at eighteen, 135 

Kellv, Colonel Thomas, a cons;iicuous 
Fenian leader, arrested at Man- 
( h^ster, 191 

Ketiealy. EdAvard Vaughan. 118 

Keoi^b. Mr. William, 145 ; made Irish 
Snjicitor-lieneral, 146 ; made a 
Judge, 14/ 

Kerry Sentinel, case of the, 330, ?81, 
347 

Kiikham, Charles J., a follower of 
•^tf'phens in the Fenian move- 
ment, 183 ; account of, ib. ; speech 
at M jllinalione, ib., 187; cap- 
ture of, 188 ; his imprisonment 
and release. 307-308 ; death and 
funeral, 308 

Killegrew, 2 

' Kilmainhnm Treaty,' the supposi- 
titi.ais, 299, 320, 324. 325, 326 

Kihvarden. Lord, Cldel Justice of the 
King's Bench, dragged from his 
carri ge and killea, 72 

Koran or death, 8 

Kosciusko, 127 



Laboucheke, Mr., 258, 287 

Ladi s' Land League, 274 ; members 
of, imprisoned, 288 ; declines to 
admit defeat, 293 ; abolished by 
Messrs. Parnell and Dillon, ih. 

Lake, General, successor to Sir Ralph 
Abercrombie, 49 

Lalor, Fintan, 129, lol 

Land League, the, 228, 239 sqq. ; de- 
clared an illegal body, 28« ; sup- 
pression of, 289, 290,'301 

Land Question, the, 168-176 

Landen, battle of, 6 

Langrishe, Sir Hercules, a colleague 
of Flood, 25 ; Burke's eulogium 
on, 28 

Law, Mr. Hugh, Irish Lord Chan- 
cellor, 332 ; death of, 334 

Lawson, Mr. Justice, commits Sheriff 
(iray to prison for contempt of 
Court, r,05. '-!06 ; attempt to as- 
sassinate, 310 

Leck\ , Mr., on the Irish borough 
system, 16 ; his essay on Grattan, 
26 ; on Henry Flood, 36 ; on the 
hish Penal Code, 40, 63 ; on the 



MAO 

eloquerce of Meagher, 126, 127 
on the Home Rule theory, 218 

Ledru Rollin, declaration of, 121 

Legion Club, he, 23 

Lely, S'.r Peter, his be.'uities, 2 

Lepell, the beautiful INIoUj^, married 
to Lord Hervcy, 32 

Limerick, siege of, 1-4 ; treaty of- 
5-9 

Lloyd, Major Cliff- ird, extraordinary 
circular of, 296 

Locke, John, 19 

Louis XIV., 5 

Louis XVI., execution of, 86 

Lovelace, Ricdmrd, quo > d, 189 

Lowe, Robert, hi- tierce attack upon 
the Irish Chun/h, 199 ; his hour 
of more than Ro >'an i riumph, 347 

Luby, Thomas Clarke, accompanies 
James Stephens on his-' tour of 
personal inspection ' in Ireland, 
152 ; a conspic-ous follow r this 
in the Fenian movement, 183- 
185 ; arrested, 187 ; sentenced 
to twenty years' penal servitude, 
190 

Lucan, Earl of. See Sarsfield, Patrick 

Lucan, La-y, 6. See also Clanri- 
carde 

Lucas, Frederick, proprietor of the 
Tablet, 144 ; one of the most up- 
riglit and pure-minded of politi- 
cians, 145 

Lucas, Samuel, founder of ihe Free- 
VMii's Journal, 21, 23, 26 ; 352 

Luxembourg, G 

Lytron, P^dward Bulwer, Lord, his 
poem of ' St. Stephen's ' quoted, 92 



Macaulay on Patrick SarsfieLl, Earl 
of Lucan, 6 ; on Addison, 264 

MacCartby, Denis Florence, a con- 
tributor to the Nation, 123 ; death 

. t, m 

Madrid, Gallerv of, 119,326 

M'Mauus, Terence Bellew, trans- 
ported to Van Dienien's Land, 
131; escapes to California, 178; 
closing j^ears and death, 178, 179; 
funeral cortege through Dublin to 
Glasnevin, 179, 180 

M'Naniara, Major, declines to contest 
Clare, 96 

MacNevin, 46 ; banished, 51 ; a con- 
tributor to the Nation, 123, 125 



INDEX. 



863 



MAG 

Maguire, Mr. John Francis, 145 ; 
leader of the Irish p n ty, 174 ; 
strikes the first serious blow 
against the Established Church 
io Ireland, 198 ; ■withdraws hia 
resolutions in favour of Mr. Glad- 
sroiie's, 199 

Mallow, one of the most ])eculiar con- 
stituencies in thes nth of Ireland, 
314 ; election for, o 14-3 15 

Mangan, Clarence (a contributor to 
the Nation), bis brilliant and un- 
happy giuius, 123 ; oescrib d by 
Sir Charles Gavaa Dufty, 124 

Marseillaise, the, 48 

Miirtin, John, 130 ; transported, 181 ; 
elected for Meath, 217 ; death of, 
133, 221 

* Ma ry of the Nation ' and Joe Brenan, 

135, 140 

Mass- stone, the, 13 

Math{?\v, Faiher, the inaugurator of 
the temperance movement, 112; 
I! akes common cause with 
O'Connell, 113 

Maynooth Grant, increaseil, 84 ; again 
reduced, 85 

Mayo, Lord. Irish Secretary, his occult 
phrase about ' levelling ixp,' 198 

Mazzini and Mr. Forster, 325-326 

M'Cabe, Archbi>hop of Duldin, de- 
nounces the participation of 
women in political strife, 274 

MacLarthy, Mr. John George, a very 
moderate Home Kuler, member 
for Mallow, 314 

Meagher, Thomas Francis, speech of, 
50; his eloquence, 126 ; his speech 
against O'Connell's doctrine of 
passive resistance, 127 ; his 
speeches not studied as they de- 
serve, 127-128 ; endeavour to 
raise an armed rebellion, 131 ; 
speech from the dock, ib. ; trans- 
ported, ih. ; in the American civil 
war, 132, 182 ; curious and grimly 
inapprojjriate end of his brilliant 
career, 1 33 ; his description of 
Terence Bellew M -Manns, 178 

* Memory of the Dead, The,' one of the 

best and bravest of Irish re- 
bellious ballads, 48 

*M'Grath, Terence,' his ' Pictures from 
Ireland ' quoted, 335-336 

M'Hale, John, Archbishop of Tuam, 
early training of, 13, 14 



NAG 

Milbank, Sir Frederick, and Mr. 
Biggar, 266 

Mill, -lohn Stuart, 156-157 ; his ex- 
ertions to save the men of Man- 
chester, 193 ; not re-elected for 
Westminser, 200 ; 208 

Mirabeau, pntest of, 46, 99 ; his 
shilling sentences, 127; saying of, 
155 

Mitciiel, John, fine words of, 5 ; re- 
places Thomas Davis on the 
Nation, 129 ; starts the Untied 
Irislniuni, ih. ; ar/ ested, tried, and 
transported, 130 ; no attempt to 
rescue him, ib., 134 ; effects his 
escape while a prisoner on 
parnle, 132 ; his return to Ireland 
and death, 133; unknown to the 
large bulk of the Irish peasantry, 
139 ; saying of, 141 ; disqu;ilified 
to sit in P;irliament, 133, 295 

Mitchell-Henry, Mr., 216-217 

Moira, Lord, protest of, 49 

Molvneux, William, his ' Case of Ire- 
'land.' 19, 20, 33, 352 

Monteagle, Lord. See Spring Rice, Mr. 

Moore, Georae Henry, leader of the 
Irish Parliamentary part}', 174 

Moore, Roger, 352 

Moore, Thomas, on Sheridan's wife 
and Lord Edward Fitzgerald, 45 ; 
at Dublin University, 66 ; his 
friendship with Robert E;nnut, 
67 ; his song of 'The Irish P, a- 
sant to his Mistress,' 195 ; his 
Vale of A voca, 220 

Mountain (cobbler), a grimly appro- 
priate rame, 137 

Mpyers. Dr., i.ord Mayor of Dublin, 
gives his casting-vote against 
conferring the freedom of the cit}' 
upnu Mr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon, 
288-289 ; is refused the customary 
vote of thanks on his retirement 
from office, 292 

iMurcer, Henri, 124 

Murphy, Father John, 51, 352 

Murphy, Fa' her Michael, supposed to 
be invulnerable, 51 

Musgrave, Sir Richard, his work on 
the Hebellionof Ninetv-eight, 77, 
78 

Nagi.e, Pierce, the infamous informer, 
180 ; betrays Stephens to the 
Government, 185 



364 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION 



NAP 

Napier, Mr., Irish Attorney-General, 
174 

Napoleon, Emmet's interviews with, 
70 ; defeats the allied armies at 
Austerlitz, 82, 83 

Nation, the, newspaper, 48, 1 14, 1 15, 
119 ; puWication of the first 
number, 120 ; motto of, ib. ; con- 
tributors to, 121-120 ; tilled a 
great want in Trelnnd, 122, 139; 
upholds its traditions of Nation- 
alism through lonsf years under 
disheartening conditions, 234 

Newman, Cardinal, 99 

Newton, Sir John, presides over a 
se'ect committee to inquire into 
Irish agricultural distress, 169 

Norburv, Judge, his brutal interrup- 
tions to Emmet's address at his 
trial, 73 

No-rent Manifesto, the, 288 ; the 
clergy entirely against it, ib.; 292 

Northcote, Sir Stafford, his appeal 
against obstruction, 266 ; his 
crusade into Ulster, 337. See 
also Iddesleigh, Lord. 



Oakboys, 15 

O'Brien, William, editor of United 
Ireland.ZlZ ; committed for trial, 
314 ; returned by a large majority 
for Mallow, 315 ; his exposure 
of official corruption at Dublin 
Castle, 344 

O'Brien, William Smith, comesforward 
as a prominent fic:ure in Irish 
politics, 125, 126,129; tries to 
raise an armed rebellion, 131 ; 
transported to Van Diemen's 
Land, ib. ; receives his pardon, 
lo3 ; death of, ib. ; anecdote of, 
138 ; 148, 149 ; allowed to return 
to Ireland, 153 ; his speech at 
Clonmel, 154; his appeal to the 
Irish people against the Phoenix 
conspiracy, 154-155 

« Obstruction,' 223, 224 

O'Callaghan, Mr., 6 

O'Connell, Daniel, uncle of the libera- 
tor, romantic career of, 86 

O'Connell, Daniel, declaration of, 42 ; 
his parentage and eirly career, 
85-91 ; growing influence of, 89 ; 
unworthy passages in his life. 90, 
10 1 ; his oratorical powers, 92 ; 



O KE 

his duel with Mr. D'Esterre, 93 -, 
his first appearance in the English 
House of Commons, 93-95; 
re-elected and takes his seat, 101 ; 
portrait of, ib. ; 109, and Father 
Mathew, 112, 113; his monster 
meetings, 114 ; never intended 
to use force, 115, 121 ; his dis- 
persal of the Chmtarf meeting, 
116 ; imprisoned, ib. ; waning ip- 
fluence, ib.\ his hopeless passion 
for a young girl, 117 ; his death 
at Genoa, ib. ; alarmed at the 
growing popularity of the Nation 
newspaper, 120, 121 ; and Smith 
O'Brien, 125-126 ; unveilingof his 
statue in Dublin, 304, 305 ; his 
societies for the promotion of 
Catholic Emancipation, 308 

O'Connell, John, son of Daniel 
O'Connell, interrupts a speech of 
Meagher's, 128 

O'Connell, Morgan, father of Daniel 
O'Connell, 85 

O'Connell, Morris, eldest son of Daniel 
O'Connell's grandfather, 85 

O'Connor, Arthur, 48, 61, 58, 120 

O'Connor, Mr. T. P. ( Home Ruler), his 
' Life of Lord Beaconslield,' 233 

O'Doherty, Kevin Izod, 120 ; trans- 
ported, lol ; still living, 133 

O'Donoghue, the, 165, 180 ; speech of, 
261, 269 

O'Donovan Rossa, Jeremiah, 152 ; 
sentenced to penal servitude for 
life, 190; disqualified to sit in 
P;irlianieni, 294 

O'Flaherty, Mr. Edmund, 145 ; made 
Commissioner of Income Tax, 
146 ; his flight to Denmark and 
to America, 147 

O'Gorman Mahon, Colonel, r mark- 
able adventures of, 97 ; rifty 
years ago. 98 ; 235 

O'Hagan, John, his impassioned 
poems in the Nation newspaper, 
57, 123 ; his translation of the 
* Chanson de Roland,' ib. ; takes 
service under the English Go- 
vernment, ib. 

O'Hagan, Thomas (afterwards Lord), 
his brilliant defence of Daniel 
O'Sullivan, 155 

O'Kelly, Mr. James (Home Ru'er), 
adventurous career of in foreign 
parts, 234, 235 



INDEX. 



365 



O LB 

O'Leaiy, John, a follower of Stephens 
in the Fenian movemenr, 183 ; 
character and career of, 184, 187; 
sentenced to twenty years' penal 
servitude, 190 

OMahony, John, at Paris with 
James Stephens, 150-151; in 
America, 177; sonit thing of a 
Gaelic scholar and student, ih. 

Omar, 8 

Oran.ue Societj', the, origin of, 77 : in- 
tolerable cruelties of, 88 ; revival 
of the feud, 334, >iqq. 

Ormond admin istrafii)n, 3 

Ormontl, last Duke of, his vicerovalty, 
9 

O'Sullivan, Daniel, defended by Mr. 
Thomas O'Hagan, 155 ; sentenced 
to ten years' penal servitude, ih. 

Othman, 8 



Palafox, 325 

Pall Mali Gazette on Mr. Parnell, 343 
Palmerston, Lord, death of, 156 ; his 
summary dismissal from office, 
347, 349 
Parnell. Charles Stuart, 90, 97; 
family and parentage, 220 ; elec- 
ted member of parliament for 
Meath, 221 ; attracts no notice 
at first in the House, ih. ; but 
gradually forces his way till his 
name begins to be talked about, 
ib. ; not to be howled or shouted 
down, 222 ; opposition to the 
Prison O de and Army and Navy 
Mutiny Bills. 224 ; to the South 
African Confederation Bill, 225- 
226 ; his mission to America, 
228 ; real leader of the Irish 
party, 229, 230; his popularity 
through Ireland, 232 ; his fol- 
lowers, 233-236, 245 ; motion 
of, 247 ; his pale, unmoved face, 
264 ; 265 ; speech erroneously 
attributed to, 2G7 ; question on 
Mr. Michael Davitfs imprison- 
ment, 267, 268; suspended, 269, 
270 ; his visit to Paris and in- 
terviews with the Archbishop 
and with Victor Hugo and M. 
Rochefort, 273 ; explains his 
views to the Newcastle conven- 
tion, 282 ; enthusiastic reception 
at Dublin, 283 ; entry into Cork 



riT 

■with Father Sheehy, 284; Mr. 
Gladstone's censure of, 281-285 ; 
his attack at Wexf)rd on Mr. 
Gladstone, 285-286 ; arrested and 
conve3'ed to Kilm inhani, 286 ; 
signs the No-rent Manifesto, 
287-288 ; his name removed 
from the Commission of the 
Peace for the Coun*-v of Wick- 
low, 288; in Kilmainham, :?1»0; 
292, 294 ; release on paro'e 
and return to Kilmainliam, 
298 ; unconditional relea e, 2'i9 ; 
freedom of the city v*f l)u Lu 
conferred uj on him, 305 ; on the 
Irish National Leigue, 308 : his 
views on the land question. hO;» ; 
315 ; accompanies Mr. Healy cu 
his Monaghan campaign, ;> >2 ; 
a guest at the banquet to celebrate 
the openinu' of the Cork In his- 
trial Exhibition, 333; bamiuet lo, 
at Dublin, and presentatinii of tha 
testimonial, 341 ; his speech on 
the occasion, 341-342 ; opinions 
of the Irish and English press, 
842-343 

Parnell, Miss Anna (sister of the 
above), President ot the Ladies' 
Land League, 274, 293 

Parnell, Sir Henry, the first Lord 
Congleton, 220 

Parnell, Sir John, 59 

Parnell, Thomas, the poet, 220 

Parthenope, 33 

Pascal, 147 

Peel, Sir Robert, 95 ; opposes O'Con- 
nell's taking his seat under the 
new oatlis, 100, 101 ; his -con- 
temptuous inquiry in Parliament, 
120, 121, 172 

Penal Laws, the, 1-14 

Perceval, Spencer, 84 

Persius, 147 

Petrarch, Lord Charlemont's transla- 
tions of, 31 

Petronius, 24 

Philippe Egalite, daughter of, 45, 46 

Phoenix Conspiracy, the, 152, sqq., 
177 

Phoenix-Park murders, 301, 302, 317, 
318, 320-322 

Pigot, John, ' the woman's ideal of a 
patriot,' 123 

Pitt, William, his tools against the 
Irish, 49 ; his pledge to Ireland in 



366 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



PLA 

securing the Union, 68 ; his re- 
signation, 69 ; return to office, 76, 
77,81, 82 ; death of, 83, ^7 

Playfair, Mr. (afterwards Sir) Lyon, 
208 ; takes the Speaker's place, 
265, 266 

Plunket, Mr., 324, 825 

Poe, Ediiar Allan, 123, 124 ; his poem 
of ' The Raven ' quoted, 123 

Ponsonbj', 18 

Pope, Alexander, his satire on Lord 
Herve.v, 32 

Poyning's Act, rejieal of, 2 

Pri e, Mr. Bonamy, 277 

Pulteney, h's duel with Lord Hervey, 
32 ; his secession from the House 
of Commons, 2 7 

Punch, cartoon in, 332 ; severe in its 
condemnation of the Orange 
policy, 340 



QuiNN, Mr. J. P., Secre*^ary of the 
Land League, arrested ai.d con- 
veyed to Kilmainham, 286 ; pro- 
secution of, 311 ; released from 
prison, 331 



Reade, Charles, his novel of ' The 
Cloister and the Hearth,' 227 

Redmond, Mr., elected member for 
Wexford, 332, 3i]3 

Repeal of tlie Union, 92, 113 

Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 31 

Reynolds, Ti omas, spy, 49, 50 

Ribbonmen. 88 

Ribbon Society, the, 141-142 

Richey, Mr., on the fu ility of certain 
cl'tuses in the Irish L;ind Act of 
1870, attempting to create a pea- 
sant proprietorship, 176 

Richmond Conin ission, t'e, 277 

Richter, Jean Paul, his ' Flower, Fruit, 
and Thorn Pieces,' 146 

Robinson, Chief Ju-tice, 10. 

Roche, Father Philip, 51 

Rochefort, M., interview with Mr. 
Parnell, 273 

Roe, Owen, 3.')2 

Rogers, Mr. Tho o'd, 258 

RoBsmore, Lord, Orange proclamation 
and speech, 338, 339 ; removed 
from the commission of the peace, 
339-340 

Rouget de Lisle, 48 



SHE 

Rousseau, Jean Baptiste, his poem to 
posterity, 22 

Rowan, Hamilti n, his escape to Ame- 
rica, 43 ; Curran's defence of, 56 

Row'ev's poems, 135 

Russell. Lord John, caniesthe Repeal 
of the Test and Corporation Acts, 
95 ; his suggestion to O'Connell, 
ib. ; sett'es the Irish Tithe Ques- 
tion, 108; his 'Durham letter,' 
144; plan for kidnapping him, loO 



Sadleth, James, brother of John Sad- 
lelr, 145, 146; expelled from the 
House of Commons, 147 

Sadleir. John, 115; his remarkable 
ability and audacity, ib. ; made a 
Lord of the Treasury, 146 ; his 
wholesale forgery and embezzle- 
ment, ib. ; supposed suicide, ib. ; 
and doubts respecting it, 146-147 

Salisbury, Lord, 280, 281; on Mr. 
Gladstone's complaints of Mr. 
Parnell, 285 ; accepts office, 344, 
345 

Sarsfield, Patrick, Earl of Lucan, his 
def nee of Limerick, 1-6 ; death 
ft; 6-8; 352 

Saturn, 87 

Scicvola, !30 

Sell Her, his immor'r.l heroine, 196 

Scullabogue, 52, 53 

Secret Societies, 142 ; growth of, 289, 
290, 301 

Seward, William Henrv, 121 

Sexton, Mr. (Home Ruler), 233 ; a 
contributor lo the Naiion news- 
paper, 234; elected member of 
parliament for Sligo, in opposition 
to Colonel King Harnian, 234 ; 
275 ; arrested and conveyed to 
Kilmainham, 286 

Shakespeare, quoted, 4, 5,52, 61, 83, 
90, 131, 189, 233 

Shaw, Mr. ('sensib e Shaw'), cho.^en 
leai'er of the Irish party in Mr. 
Butt's stead, 227 ; his leadershii) 
merely nominal, 229, 230, 232, 
233, 236, 277 

Shearps, the brothers John and Henry, 
50, r>l ; pre ent at the execution 
of Louis XV^I., 86; in death as 
in li'e undivideil, 352 

Shee, Serjeant his Tenant Compen- 
sation Bill, 174 



INDEX, 



367 



SHE 

Sheehy, Father E'.ujjene, arrested and 
imprisoned, 275 ; set free, 283 ; 
commences a crusade against the 
Government, 284 ; liis entry into 
Cork, ib. 

Sheil, Richard Lai or, on Wolfe Tone, 
44; his attack on the Duke of 
York, 79, 80 ; his description of 
the O'Gorman Miihon, 98 ; his 
eloquence and genius, 99 ; his 
brilliant and fascinating picture 
of the Clare contest, 100 

Shepp^^rd. Jack, prison-breaking feats 
of, 189 

Shepstone, Sir Theophilus, his annex- 
ation of the Transvaal, 225 

Sheridan, Richard Brinsley, 45 

Sieves, Abbe, 219 

SiiT, Major, infamies of his ganj;, 48, 
50, 72, 7o, 88, 94 ; spectre of, 353 

Skibbereen Literary Society, 152, 153 

'Sli.tbli Cuiliun,' signature of Mr. 
O'Hagan, 57 

Smith O'Brien. See O'Brien 

Smith, Svdney, on the exactions of 
the Irish Church, 104 

Smyrna Bay, 33 

Smyth, Mr. P. J., an earnest and 
active Nationalist, effects the 
rescue of Irish political pri.-oners, 
131 ; his later life only melan- 
choly, 132 ; speech abounding in 
sneers against England, 180, 181 ; 
dies the pi seem an of an English 
Government, 181 ; 216-217 

Smythe, Mrs. Henry, murder of, 295 

Somerville, Sir William, Irish Secre- 
tary, 173 

Spencer, Lord, succeeds Lord Cowper, 
as Lord-Ueutenant of Ireland, 
300, 301 ; survey s a terrible scene 
from the windows of the Vice- 
regal Lodge, 302 ; Mr. Biggar's 
attack on, 311, 342-343, 344 

' Speranza,' nom-de-guerre of Lady 
Wilde in the Nation, 121 

•Sporus,' Pope's nickname for Lord 
Hervey, 32 

Spring Rice, Mr., afteiwards Lord 
Monteagle, 170 

Stephens, Jatnts, 148-150; at Paris, 
150 ; returns to Ireland on ' a 
tour of personal inspection,' 151- 
152 ; finds ready confederates, 
152; leader of the Phoenix Society, 
ib. ; not disheartened by tempo- 



TON 

rary defeat, 177; establishes the 
l7-ish People nowspiper, 185 ; be- 
traved bv Pierce Naglo, ib ; flight, 
186-187"; capture, 188 ; and 
escape, 189 

Stepniak, the Russian Nihilist, his 
record of 'Russia under the 
Tzars,' 75 

Stone, Primate, his base and profli- 
gate character. 24 

Sullivan, Mr. A. M., on the varieties 
of Ribbonism, 143 ; on the fune- 
ral of Terence Bp lew M'Manas, 
179 ; his account of J( ill ii< ) Ltary, 
184, and of Thomas Clarke 1 uby, 
184-185; on thePaniellitcop]) si- 
tion to the Prison Code and Army 
and Navy Mutiny Bills, 224, 269 ; 
defends the Ladies' Land League, 
274 ; compelled by ill- health to 
resign his seat in Parliament, 
294 

Sullivan, Mr. T D. (H(me Ruler), 
touching poem by, 194 ; proprie- 
tor of the Nation, 234 ; a true 
poet of the people, ib. 

Surrey, Earl of, 45 

Swift, Jonathan, on the Iri.>h bishops, 
19 ; his services to Ireland, 20, 
21, 24 ; his list of friends, 26, 33; 
his small fervid figure, 352 

Swinburne, Algernon Charles, his 
' Appeal to England ' on behalf 
of th- men of Manchester, 193 

* Syndercombe, Letters of,' 25 



Talbot, Richard, Duke of Tirconnel, 
2, 3 ; death of, 4 ; his weary, 
haughty face, 352 

Thackeray, W. M . on John Dillon 
ihe elder, 119; on the Eastern 
Counties' train , 258 

Times newspaper, the, i)rophe.>ies 
the gradual extinction of the 
Celtic Irishman, 141 ; its un 
timely and unseemly merriment 
over Mr. Smith Bri'n's speech 
atClonnul, 154; on Mr. Parnell's 
Sfteech at the Rotunda Banquet, 
342 

Tirconnel, Duke of. See Talbot, 
Richard 

Tithe War, the, 102, sqq. 

Tone, Iheobald Wolfe, 41 ; his tem- 
porary exile in America, 43,^44 ; 



B68 



IRELAND SINCE THE UNION. 



TOU 

his widow, 46 ; protests against 
the title of 'citizen,' ib.; in France, 
47 ; his arrest and sentence, 54 ; 
his death in prison, 55 ; his grave, 
i6.,58, 61, 179; 352 

Toussaiut, L'Ouverture, 96 

Townsliend, Lord, Viceroyaltv of, 24- 
25, 29^ 

Traill, Mnjor, R.M., cnrions picture of 
his daily life, 295-296 

Treaty of Limerick, 4-9 

Trevelj'an, Mr. G. O., appointed 
Chief Secretary fa- Ireland, 303 ; 
praise due to, 305 ; his great 
ambition, 342 ; gives up the Irish 
Secretaryship, 314; retirement 
from Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet, 
346 

Turk, the ' unspeakable,' 31 

Tyrtaeus, 48, 178 



Ulster tenant-right cuftom, 240, 
243, 278 

Union, the, 56 

United Ireland, the most advanced of 
the National newspapers, pro- 
scribed, 288 ; suppressed and 
seized, but continues to appear 
surreptitiously, 297, 313-315 

United Irishman newspaper, started 
by John Mitchel, 129 

United Irishmen, Society of, founded 
by Wolfe Tone, 41-43, 55 

* Usher Maillard, shifty,' 293 



Vklasquez, 119, 326 
Vergniaud, shining sentences of, 127 
Vernon, Lieut.-Col., testimony of, 78 
Victoria, Queen, visit to Dublin, 134 
Volunteer movement in Ireland, 29-38 



ZUL 

Wali.enstein's horse, 280 

Walpole, Horace, 31 

Washington, George, 29, 33 

Wellesle}', his Lord-Lieutenantship, 
88 

Wellington, Duke of, 95 

Whiteboys, 15 

Wide, Lady, a contributor to the 
Nation newspaper, 121 

Wilkes, John, his answer to a threat 
of Luttrell's, 59 

Wiliinm III., King, 3, 6 ; no excuse 
for, 8, 9 ; his camp at Exeter, 77 

Williams, poetry of, in the Nation,\'2') 

Wingfield, Hon. Lewis, his powerful 
novel, ' Mv Lords of Strogue,' 52, 
53 

Wolfe, Rev. Mr., nephew of Lord 
Kilwarden, tragic fate of, 72 

Wolfe Tone. See Tone 

Wolseley, Sir Garnet, proposal to con- 
fer the freedom of the city of 
Dublin on, 309 ; withdrawn 
owing to a current rumour, con- 
tradicted by Sir Garnet, 310 

Wood's copper money, 20 

Wordsworth quoted, 96 

Woulfe, Stephen, phrase of his in Par- 
liament chosen as a motto for the 
Nation newspaper, 120 



York, Duke of, his ostentatious 
patronage of the Orange Society, 
78 ; i/t articulo mortis, 79, 80 

Young, Arthur, on the condition of 
the Irish peasantry, 14 

Young Ireland, 101 



ZoLULAND, policy of the Government 
in, 324 




<s- 


■■\^ 


./ 


%■ 


^^ 




■A . V 1 


8 k 


s'^ ^ 




•^ £0'f(Ti 


r^^^ 




yy^\:? 


> ^^m\ 


'^yyj% 










LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 342 785 4 




